gsap-performance

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Monitor GSAP animation performance' without detailing what happens (e.g., starts monitoring, returns tips, side effects). The actual behavior for each action is left implicit, lacking transparency.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it may be too terse for the level of detail needed, as it omits important information about the tool's behavior and usage.

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 one parameter with enums and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the outcome of each action, the output format, or any performance metrics, leaving significant gaps for the agent to infer.

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?

Although the parameter 'action' is fully covered in the schema with an enum and descriptions ('Performance action'), the description adds no additional meaning beyond that. The enum values 'monitor' and 'tips' remain unexplained in the description, reducing the value for the agent.

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 'Monitor GSAP animation performance' clearly states the action (monitor) and resource (GSAP animation performance), and it effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like gsap-animate or gsap-draggable, which focus on creating animations rather than monitoring.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify prerequisites, exclude other tools, or explain the difference between the 'monitor' and 'tips' actions. The enum suggests two modes, but their intended use cases are not clarified.

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