cacheout_get_memory_stats

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds mode-dependent behavior (app mode vs standalone mode) and details about the memory_tier field. No contradictions with annotations.

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 well-structured, front-loading the purpose and listing all returned fields. The sample output is helpful but slightly lengthy. Every sentence adds value.

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 the tool's complexity (many return fields, mode behavior), the description covers all aspects: what it returns, when to use, and mode details. Annotations and the implicit output schema are sufficient.

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 tool has no actual parameters (the input schema's nested object has no properties). The description adds no parameter info because none is needed. Schema coverage is 0%, but that is irrelevant as there are no parameters to describe.

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 that the tool gets current system memory statistics on macOS, listing all returned fields and their purpose. It is distinct from sibling tools like cacheout_get_disk_usage and cacheout_get_compressor_health.

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 provides context for when to use the tool: 'check memory health before builds, heavy tasks, or when investigating performance issues.' It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references, but the usage context is clear.

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