load_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It only states 'load for analysis' without disclosing potential side effects (e.g., file permissions, memory impact) or whether it modifies files.

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 efficient sentences with no unnecessary words. Front-loads the core action and immediately provides workflow context.

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?

Completeness is adequate given no output schema. The description covers file loading and directs to complementary tools (check_status, get_*), fulfilling the context gap for a loading tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds minimal value beyond the schema. It lists supported file extensions but doesn't elaborate on the baselineFilePath parameter's usage beyond the schema description.

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 loads existing snapshot files (.jps, .hprof, .jfr) for analysis. The verb 'load' and resource 'file' are specific, though it could better distinguish from siblings like 'attach'.

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 instructs to call check_status to monitor loading progress and then use get_* tools to retrieve data. Provides actionable workflow guidance, but doesn't mention when to avoid using this tool.

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