adb_heap_dump

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden. It reveals that the tool triggers 'am dumpheap' and pulls the file, which is sufficient. However, it does not mention potential side effects like process freezing or file size considerations.

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 with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and the essential prerequisite is mentioned immediately. Excellent conciseness.

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 has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core action and requirement fairly well. It could mention that the output is a .hprof file saved locally, but it's implied. Lacks details on error handling or duration.

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 baseline is 3. The description repeats what's in the schema (PID or package name) but adds no extra details about the parameters beyond the schema definitions.

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 action: capture a heap dump for memory analysis. It names the underlying ADB command and the file type, distinguishing it from other profiling tools like 'adb_top' or 'adb_perf_snapshot'.

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 mentions the prerequisite of providing a PID or package name, but does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives. No guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tools to consider instead.

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