analyze_trace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the behavior of the toc and xpath parameters and the summarize option. It implies a read-only analytical operation without stating it explicitly, but the two-step process is well described.

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?

Three sentences: first states purpose, second gives context, third gives precise step-by-step. Every word earns its place; no fluff.

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 4 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description adequately explains the workflow and parameter usage. It covers what the tool does and how to use it effectively.

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 100%—each parameter has a description. The description adds value beyond schema by linking parameters to the recommended workflow (e.g., 'set toc to true' and 'then call with xpath'). This provides semantic context for usage order.

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 it exports and analyzes a specific table from a .trace file. It uses a specific verb ('export and analyze') and resource ('specific table from .trace file'). The context of using after profile_raw distinguishes it from siblings like profile_raw itself.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'Use after profile_raw' and gives a step-by-step workflow ('First call with toc=true... then call with xpath'). It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the workflow is strong and context-aware.

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