get_heap_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates a read operation ('Retrieve'), but does not explicitly confirm no side effects or mention permissions, rate limits, or behavior beyond reading. With no annotations, a 3 is appropriate as it is not misleading but lacks depth.

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?

Two sentences, 20 words, with no redundancy. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second efficiently lists capabilities. Every word earns its place.

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 a moderate parameter set (3 params, 0 required), the description is mostly complete for a read tool. It names the three views, aligning with the enum. Minor gaps: no mention of return format or pagination, but these are not critical for basic usage.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, merely hinting at the views without explaining parameters in detail. The schema already documents each parameter well, so the description does not significantly enhance understanding.

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 retrieves aggregated data from a heap dump and lists three specific views (biggest objects, retained class lists, class histograms). It uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'heap dump data', effectively distinguishing it from siblings like create_heap_dump or get_performance_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 for reading heap dump data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_heap_dump. It lacks guidance on prerequisites (e.g., a heap dump must exist) or when to choose each view, leaving the agent to infer from the schema.

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