Profile a time window

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly states that it clears ACS profiling, waits N seconds, and returns results. This discloses the destructive side effect of clearing profiling, which is good.

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 sentence with a dash, which is concise but omits important parameter details. It is not inefficient, but sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter explanations, the description is incomplete. Users are left guessing about sort options, limit behavior, and instance meaning. The complexity of a profiling tool demands more detail.

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%, so the description must add meaning for all 4 parameters. It only mentions 'seconds' implicitly via 'wait N seconds', but fails to explain 'sort', 'limit', and 'instance'. This is a significant gap.

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 the verb 'profile' and resource 'time window', and distinguishes from cumulative profiling with the phrase 'what's hot right now rather than cumulative since map start'. It is specific and differentiates from sibling tools like profile_scripts.

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 implies usage for non-cumulative profiling ('what's hot right now'), but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use. It provides context but lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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