performance_profile

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether profiling is read-only, how long it takes, whether it modifies state, what data it collects, or what the output format resembles. 'Advanced performance profiling' is too vague to convey meaningful behavioral context.

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?

It is a single, short sentence with no fluff, but the word 'Advanced' adds no concrete information. The description is efficient but under-specifies the tool's functionality, making it neither well-structured nor truly informative.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and three parameters, the description leaves major gaps. It does not explain return values, edge cases, or how this profiling relates to the broader tool ecosystem, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

All three parameters are fully described in the schema, so the description adds little semantic value. The mention of 'recommendations' loosely aligns with includeRecommendations, but the description does not explicitly map parameters to behavior or add usage syntax.

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 identifies a profiling action with bottleneck detection and recommendations, but it lacks a concrete resource target and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like network_performance. 'Advanced performance profiling' is generic and could apply to multiple 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus network_performance, network_analyze, or log_analyze. There are no exclusions or alternative recommendations, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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