Inspect ThreadLocal instances grouped by value class or thread to identify thread-local leaks in heap dumps.
Inspect thread locals grouped by valueClass (default) or thread. Useful for finding thread-local leaks. / 按 valueClass（默认）或 thread 分组查看 ThreadLocal，常用于发现 ThreadLocal 泄漏。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| groupBy | No | valueClass | |
| report_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the default grouping by valueClass and the alternative grouping by thread, but it omits whether the operation is read-only, any report prerequisites, permission needs, or other side-effect details.
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 short and front-loaded, with the grouping behavior and leak-finding use stated immediately. The bilingual repetition adds length without adding new information for an English-reading agent.
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?
The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return details are not required. Still, with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description should explain the required report_id and any prerequisite about opening a report, which it does not.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It explains groupBy values and default well, but it never explains the required report_id parameter, its expected format, or where it comes from.
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 uses a specific verb, 'Inspect', and a specific resource, 'thread locals', and states the grouping options. It is clearly about ThreadLocal inspection, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as mat_threads.
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?
It gives a clear usage context: 'Useful for finding thread-local leaks.' However, it does not state when not to use it or name alternative sibling tools for related diagnostics.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.