perf_memory_report

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

With no annotations, the description effectively carries the burden by explaining the consequences of memory exhaustion (silent call kills, leak detection). It adds behavioral context beyond a simple 'report' statement.

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 concise and well-structured: one sentence for purpose, followed by clear explanations of each memory pool. No unnecessary words.

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 parameters and an output schema, the description provides sufficient context about the memory pools and their operational significance. It does not describe the output format, but the output schema covers that.

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 no parameters (0), so baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining the meaning of shm and pkg, which complements the input schema.

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 the tool reports shared-memory and per-process package-memory usage, using specific verbs and resources. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like get_memory_stats or perf_hotspots.

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 description implies usage scenarios (shm for production monitoring, pkg for leak detection) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or 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.