System & JVM stats

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of transparency. It mentions that JVM args have secrets redacted, which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or safe to call repeatedly, nor does it describe any potential side effects or performance considerations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that efficiently lists all returned data items without any fluff. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's output, making it appropriately concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple data points) and lack of output schema, the description covers all major aspects (CPU, RAM, disk, OS, Java, JVM args, GC, memory settings, Aikar's flags). It could be more complete by indicating the return format (e.g., JSON structure), but the listing is sufficient for an experienced user.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with one parameter (profileId) described as 'The id returned by load_profile.' The description adds no extra meaning to the parameter beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly lists all data types returned (CPU, RAM, disk, OS, Java version, JVM args, GC, Xmx/Xms, Aikar's flags), providing a clear and specific purpose. The title 'System & JVM stats' aligns well, and the verb 'get' is implied by the name, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_health or get_platform_info.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_health or get_summary. The description lacks any contextual usage advice, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent without decision support for tool selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.