janitor_oom_inspect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose what is read (oom_score, oom_score_adj) and that it produces recommendations, which implies a non-mutating diagnostic. It says nothing about required privileges, whether it touches or restarts processes, or any side effects.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the operation, the metrics, the target, and the value delivered. No filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter read-only diagnostic with an output schema present, the description covers the goal and subject adequately; return-value details are handled by the output schema. Only the absence of any usage/permission framing keeps it from being fully complete.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the empty schema. No parameter-level detail is needed or missing.

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 names a specific verb ("Inspect") and a precise resource ("oom_score and oom_score_adj for active agent runners"), plus the underlying goal (kernel sacrifice priority). It is clearly distinct from janitor_system_health and the sweep/clean siblings, though it never explicitly says so.

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 phrase "under memory pressure" implies the situation in which this is useful, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative among the sibling janitor tools. Usage is only inferable.

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