List running STAAD.Pro instances

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds valuable behavioral context: the alias is stable across model file changes, and a warning field appears for versions below 25.0.1. These details go beyond what annotations provide and help the agent anticipate edge cases.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses a short second paragraph for usage and conditional behavior. Every sentence contributes useful information, making it appropriately sized and well-structured.

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 tool's simplicity (0 params), rich output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what it lists, when to use it, and a notable behavior (version warning). No important gaps are evident.

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 zero parameters, so the input schema is empty. The baseline for 0 params is 4. The description reinforces 'all instances' and the return fields, but since there are no parameters to explain, it cannot add more parameter-specific meaning.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List all running STAAD.Pro instances.' It clearly states the tool's function and distinguishes it from siblings by mentioning the returned fields (alias, process ID, file path, version) and its role as a precursor to execute_code.

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 'Call this before execute_code when multiple STAAD instances may be running so you can pick the right one.' This gives a clear when-to-use directive and a rationale, which is more than the minimal context needed for a simple listing tool.

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