find_render_processes_alias

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

No annotations are provided, and the description is limited to stating it is an alias. No behavioral traits (e.g., idempotency, side effects) are disclosed beyond the reference to the sibling, which is insufficient for a tool that likely performs an action.

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 (one short sentence), but it omits essential information, making it under-specified rather than genuinely concise. Every sentence should earn its place; this one does not provide standalone value.

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 has no output schema, no annotations, and one undocumented parameter, the description should provide substantial context. It fails to do so, leaving the agent unable to understand what the tool does or how to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the single parameter 'app_name'. The agent has no clue what this parameter does or how to use it. Baseline would be 3 with full coverage, but here description must compensate and fails completely.

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 states 'Alias for scan_creative_apps,' which implies the tool performs the same function as that sibling. However, it does not independently describe what the tool does, relying entirely on the sibling's definition. This is vague without external context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this alias versus the original scan_creative_apps or other sibling tools like emergency_throttle_process. The agent has no basis to choose this tool over alternatives.

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