detect_memory_leaks

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

The '[mode: real]' hint offers a small behavioral clue, but with no annotations the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose side effects, whether it modifies files, requires running the app, or any permissions needed, leaving significant behavioral uncertainty.

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?

A single, concise sentence that directly states the tool's function. No fluff or redundant information, every word contributes to the core message.

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?

With three parameters, zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far from complete. It does not explain parameter semantics, output format, or operational context, making it inadequate for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the three parameters (projectPath, analysisType, minLeakSizeMB). An agent cannot infer what values to pass, especially for analysisType and minLeakSizeMB, without external knowledge.

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 uses a specific verb 'Detect' and names precise resource types ('memory leaks, retain cycles, unclosed resources'), clearly distinguishing this tool from sibling detection tools like detect_race_conditions and detect_security_issues.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it detects, leaving the agent to infer usage context without any exclusions or recommendations.

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