Hottest methods (self time)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the effect of excludeNative but does not mention that the tool is read-only, or that it returns a sorted list of top N methods. The output format is not described, which is a gap.

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?

Two sentences, each dense with information. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the main action.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should cover more about the return structure and usage context. It lacks guidance on integrating with load_profile, and does not explain that the result is a list of methods with self-time values.

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?

The description adds little beyond what the schema already provides. The default thread and excludeNative effect are restated from schema. For topN parameter, no additional detail is given beyond min/max. With 75% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 clearly states it returns top methods by self-time on a specific thread, with the title reinforcing the 'hottest methods' concept. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_call_tree which would provide a hierarchical view.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_call_tree or search_call_tree. The description implies it is for hotspot analysis but does not say when not to use it.

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