top_consumers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that no sudo is required, which is a helpful behavioral trait. However, it does not mention other aspects like read-only nature or return format, leaving room for improvement.

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 extremely concise with three short sentences, each serving a clear purpose: what it does, when to use, and a key behavioral note. 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?

Despite no annotations and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, usage context, and a distinguishing feature (no sudo). For a simple zero-parameter tool, this is sufficient.

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 tool has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and there is no need for additional parameter descriptions.

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 tool shows the top-5 CPU and memory consumers, using a specific verb ('zeigt') and resource. Among sibling tools like 'processes_list' and 'memory_usage', this tool is uniquely focused on a top-5 overview, distinguishing it effectively.

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 mentions it's 'useful for quick performance diagnosis', indicating when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to more detailed alternatives among siblings, such as 'processes_list' for deeper analysis.

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