plan_inference_profile

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that it is 'diagnostic-only' and that it builds a plan rather than executing anything. However, it does not explicitly state that no profiling is started or that the plan must be run separately, which would be clearer. No contradiction with annotations.

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 entire description is a single 8-word sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Build'. Every word earns its place; it is concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, output schema present, strong annotations), the description is minimally viable but lacks some contextual guidance: it doesn't explain what the resulting plan is used for, nor that it should be followed by run_inference_profile. It also doesn't mention any prerequisites like server configuration. For such a simple tool, it is adequate but has clear 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?

The input schema has two required parameters with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description mentions 'one managed vLLM server' which partially clarifies server_name, but it does not mention the 'profiler' parameter or its enum values. Thus, the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving the agent to infer from the enum itself.

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 the specific verb 'Build' with the specific resource 'profile plan' and explicitly scopes to 'one managed vLLM server.' The phrase 'diagnostic-only' and the contrast with sibling 'run_inference_profile' clearly distinguish this planning tool from execution tools.

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 states what the tool does but does not explicitly say when to use it or name alternatives. The word 'plan' implies it is a precursor to running a profile, but there is no mention of 'use run_inference_profile to execute this plan.' Thus, usage is implied rather than explicit.

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