Inspect a .trace bundle's TOC + suggest analyzers

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

Discloses that it runs 'xcrun xctrace export' and returns specific fields like schemas, device info, and suggestedNextCalls. Also describes fallback and empty trace behavior. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and usage guidance, and covers fallback and return details efficiently. It is slightly verbose but 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 no output schema and many sibling analyzers, the description is exceptionally complete. It explains the return format (schemas, row counts, device, OS, etc.), includes a suggestedNextCalls array to guide tool selection, and addresses empty traces and fallback behavior.

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 single parameter 'tracePath' has a description in the schema that is already clear. The description adds minor context (e.g., 'output of xcrun xctrace record or Instruments'), but with 100% schema coverage, the value added is limited, warranting a baseline of 3.

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 is an orientation tool for .trace bundles, listing specific outputs like schemas, row counts, and suggested analyzers. It distinguishes itself from sibling analyzers by positioning itself as the first call to avoid blindly chaining analyzers.

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?

Explicitly recommends using this as the first call when handed a .trace, and describes a fallback path for older xctrace versions. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives for other scenarios.

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