get_causal_chains

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

Discloses key behaviors: deduplicates by operation, TSC-compressed by default, works with live and saved DBs. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden; it implies read-only analysis but doesn't explicitly state no mutations or permissions needed.

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 concise, front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy. No wasted words.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, it sufficiently describes return values. Parameters are all covered with usage notes. Minor omissions like error handling or edge cases do not significantly detract.

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 adds value by explaining top_n default, 'since' usage for live vs saved, and TSC compression context ('AI-first'). This goes beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 analyzes CUDA + host events and returns causal chains with severity, root cause, and recommendations. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_stacks or get_trace_stats.

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?

Provides guidance on when to omit 'since' (for saved DBs) and explains default behavior (top 10). However, it lacks explicit comparison to alternatives or when not to use this tool versus siblings.

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