perf_heap_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., execution pause, resource usage), what the snapshot contains, how results are returned, or any permissions required. The tool is described as a simple action but lacks detail on what happens after invocation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It directly states the action and purpose, making it easy to scan and understand.

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?

For a tool with no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description conveys the core purpose but leaves out critical context for an agent: what the snapshot output looks like, whether it's a file path, data object, or saved state, and what to do after taking it. It is minimally viable but not fully complete.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema is empty (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter-specific details because none are needed. With no parameters, the baseline is 4 per the guidance, and the description adequately fulfills the role by explaining what the tool does.

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 states a specific action ('take a heap memory snapshot') with a clear resource ('heap memory') and a stated purpose ('find memory leaks'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like perf_cpu_profile_start (CPU profiling) and perf_metrics (general metrics).

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?

The phrase 'to find memory leaks' provides clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as using CPU profiling for performance issues instead. Still, the purpose inference is strong enough to guide an agent.

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