native_memory_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the prerequisite and behavior when prerequisite is not met. However, it does not describe side effects (e.g., performance impact) or the format of the output, which are important for an AI agent assessing execution safety.

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?

Single sentence that is clear, direct, and informative. No redundant words. It front-loads the key action and prerequisite efficiently.

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 the low complexity (single required parameter, no output schema), the description covers the basic action and prerequisite. However, it lacks details on the return value (e.g., what the summary contains) and potential issues (e.g., permission requirements). An agent might struggle to interpret the expected output.

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 has one parameter 'pid' with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain what 'pid' represents or how to obtain it, nor does it add any semantic meaning beyond the schema. This is a significant gap for an AI agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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?

Description clearly states it runs 'jcmd VM.native_memory summary=true' and specifies the prerequisite (JVM started with -XX:NativeMemoryTracking). The verb 'summary' combined with 'native_memory' and the exact command distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'heap_dump' or 'gc_class_stats'.

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?

Explicitly mentions the required JVM flag and states that if not enabled, it explains how to enable. This gives clear context on when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but given the unique nature among siblings, this is sufficient.

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