gc_stat

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

注释已声明readOnlyHint=true，描述没有添加任何超出注释的行为信息，如返回格式、是否需要权限或是否影响系统。描述仅重复了内容，没有提供附加的行为上下文，也未与注释矛盾。

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?

描述非常简洁，只有一句话，没有冗余内容。对于单一参数的工具，简洁性可接受，但可能过于简短而缺乏必要细节，不过结构上无浪费。

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?

虽然存在输出模式，但描述未提供任何关于pid的上下文，也没有说明调用前置条件或预期行为。对于这样一个简单工具，缺少对必需参数的解释导致不完整。

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为0%，描述未解释参数pid的含义、格式或用途。仅有的参数完全未说明，代理无法知道如何正确填充pid，描述没有补偿schema的缺失。

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?

描述明确列出了工具返回的内容：堆各代使用率、GC次数与累计停顿，指向了具体的资源（GC统计）。但没有显式动词如'获取'，且与兄弟工具thread_dump和heap_histogram相比，它聚焦于GC统计，可区分，但缺乏明确的动作词。

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?

描述没有说明何时使用该工具，也没有提及替代工具或排除条件。它仅陈述功能，没有指导代理在何种场景下选择它而不是thread_dump或heap_histogram。

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