profile_scenario

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

Explains sequential execution, supported step types, and returns. Lacks explicit disclosure of destructive behaviors (e.g., launching/terminating app, modifying simulator state) which would be helpful given no 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?

Five sentences covering purpose, step types, prerequisites, and returns. Concise with no fluff; could be slightly more structured but effective.

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?

For a tool with 6 parameters and complex scenario array, description covers key aspects: recording process, step types, prerequisites, and return values. Lacks mention of potential long execution time, but overall sufficient.

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 detailed descriptions. Description provides high-level context about scenario step types but does not add significant extra meaning beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Record an Instruments trace WHILE executing a scenario on a simulator.' Describes as primary tool for profiling real user flows, with specific verbs and resources. Distinguishes from siblings by combining scenario execution with profiling.

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?

Describes when to use ('primary tool for profiling real user flows'), mentions prerequisites for UI steps. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives like profile_cpu, profile_energy, etc.

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