pix_get_timing_summary

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: it reveals that the result contains flags describing data availability, and warns that an empty result may be the correct truth rather than a bug.

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 concise and well-structured, front-loading the core purpose before adding practical guidance. The illustrative examples about gpu_frames and pix_events are slightly verbose but earn their place by clarifying the contains-flags behavior.

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?

The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values. The description provides the essential entry-point context and distinguishes meaningful empty results from bugs. The only notable gap is the unaddressed timeout_seconds parameter.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter explanation in the description, the agent gets no help understanding 'timeout_seconds' or the expected format of 'capture_id'. The description focuses on output semantics rather than input semantics, so the parameters remain underdocumented.

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 what the tool covers: a timing capture's window, machine, and which tables have data. It distinguishes itself as the entry point among many siblings by explaining that its contains flags determine whether other tools will return anything.

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 explicitly says 'Start here' and explains why: the contains flags indicate which of the other tools will return data. This gives clear context for when to use this tool before consulting siblings, though it doesn't name specific sibling alternatives.

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