get_xdebug_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently discloses the key behavioral fact that this tool is a stub and not available in Clockwork, so agents can infer it will not return real data. It does not describe what exactly happens when called, but the most important limitation is stated.

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 one short sentence that front-loads the intended operation and immediately follows with the critical availability caveat. Every word earns its place and nothing is redundant.

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?

The essential fact that the tool is a stub is present, which is important given no output schema. But the description does not suggest what to do instead or what response to expect if the tool is called anyway. Pointing to a working alternative like get_xdebug_hotspots would make it 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?

The sole parameter requestId is already fully documented in the schema with 100% coverage. The description adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the 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 states a specific operation: 'Get Xdebug profiling data for a request', clearly identifying the resource and action. It does not explicitly contrast with related siblings like get_xdebug_hotspots, but the core purpose is unmistakable despite the availability caveat.

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 'stub - not available in Clockwork' is an explicit warning that this tool should not actually be used, providing a clear when-not-to-use signal. However, it does not name an alternative such as get_xdebug_hotspots, so it stops short of giving complete routing guidance.

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