get_flutter_performance_overlay

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'get' which implies a read operation, but doesn't specify if it requires specific permissions, affects device state, has rate limits, or what the output entails. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with device performance.

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 description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to parse quickly, though this conciseness comes at the cost of detail.

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 that an output schema exists, the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and a vague purpose, it's minimally adequate for a read operation but lacks details on parameters and behavioral context that would help an agent 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 0%, meaning parameters 'package_name' and 'device_serial' are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no meaning about these parameters—it doesn't explain what 'package_name' refers to (e.g., Flutter app package) or when 'device_serial' is needed. This fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 'Get Flutter rendering performance info' clearly states the action (get) and resource (Flutter rendering performance info), but it's vague about what specific information is retrieved. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_frame_stats' or 'get_gpu_info' which might also provide performance-related data, leaving ambiguity about its unique scope.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_frame_stats' and 'get_gpu_info' that might overlap in performance monitoring, there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions to help an agent choose appropriately.

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