Record CPU profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that it starts/stops and returns data but omits statefulness (e.g., whether starting a new profile stops the previous one), side effects, or performance impact. 'Bounded hotspots' is also under-explained.

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?

One sentence that is direct, front-loaded, and free of filler. Every word contributes to describing the tool's purpose and output.

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?

With no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient for a tool with 3 parameters. It doesn't define the profile return format or 'bounded hotspots', nor does it differentiate from sibling performance tools. A more thorough explanation is needed.

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 0% and the description names no parameters. sessionId and targetSessionId are completely unexplained, and the action enum's lifecycle is not clarified. The description adds no meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 starts or stops the CDP CPU profiler and returns the profile plus bounded hotspots. The verb 'start'/'stop' is explicit, and 'CPU profiler' distinguishes it from sibling performance tools like heap sampling or trace.

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 (start or stop the profiler) but provides no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites like an active session or exclusion scenarios, leaving usage partially inferred.

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