check_deadlock

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It indicates a non-destructive read operation ('Checks') and explains the internal mechanism (parsing jcmd Thread.print), but omits details on permissions or rate limits. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 two sentences: the first defines the primary action, the second expands on output and usage. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key 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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, internal mechanism, output structure, and use case. It could include more detail on required permissions or exact output fields, but it is sufficient for an AI to understand the tool's role.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes the 'pid' parameter as a process ID from 'list_java_processes'. The description adds no further parameter meaning beyond this, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Checks' and the resource 'Java-level deadlocks in the specified process'. It also details the output, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'analyze_threads' which might cover broader thread analysis.

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 usage context via 'Use for automated analysis and reports', implying when to use. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives like 'analyze_threads'.

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