magento_performance_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains that the tool scans for components and returns sorted files, but does not explicitly state whether it is read-only, if it modifies data, or any authentication needs. This leaves some ambiguity.

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 appropriately sized with two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the core action, and the second provides additional detail. Every sentence serves a purpose without redundant information.

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 has no output schema, so the description should explain return values. It states returns files sorted by complexity score, but lacks details on the exact format or how to interpret results. Given the low parameter count and clear purpose, it is mostly complete but has minor gaps.

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%, with both parameters described. The description adds value beyond the schema by providing an example for the threshold parameter ('Set higher (e.g., 5) to focus on complex files only'), which helps agents use it effectively.

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 profiles a Magento subsystem for performance bottlenecks, specifying scanning for plugins, observers, and collectors. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like magento_find_plugin by focusing on performance hotspot identification rather than individual element lookup.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool (to identify performance bottlenecks) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives. The context is clear, but lacking exclusions prevents a higher score.

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