profiler-combined-report

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool maps native hangs to React commits using wall-clock time alignment, returns a markdown report correlating hangs with React commits and memory leaks, and fails if prerequisites are not met. This is adequate, though it could mention if the tool has side effects.

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 with only 5 sentences. Each sentence serves a purpose: stating the output, explaining the mechanism, listing prerequisites, usage context, and failure condition. No unnecessary information.

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 that combines two profilers and returns a report, the description covers what it does, how it works, prerequisites, when to use, and failure condition. It lacks details on the report format beyond 'markdown', but given no output schema, this is sufficient. Minor gap: does not explain the role of the port parameter in the correlation.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Both port and device_id are documented in the schema, and the description does not elaborate on them further.

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 that the tool generates a cross-correlated report combining React Profiler and native profiler data. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like react-profiler-analyze and native-profiler-analyze, which are individual analyses.

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 to call this tool when both profilers were run in parallel on the same session, and it requires both react-profiler-analyze and native-profiler-analyze to have been called first. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the prerequisites and usage context are clear.

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