current_program

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

The description adds useful behavior beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by noting 'if any,' which signals that a null/empty result is possible when no program is running. It does not contradict the annotations, and the read-only nature is reinforced by 'Report.'

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?

A single, direct sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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, read-only, zero-parameter status query, the description is complete. It tells the agent what is reported, the file type, and the 'if any' absence case, which is enough to invoke the tool correctly without an output schema.

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 and the schema reflects that with an empty properties object, so schema coverage is complete. No parameter explanation is needed, and the baseline for a zero-parameter tool applies.

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 a specific action ('Report') and resource ('the currently running .rxe program'), and the 'currently running' qualifier distinguishes it from sibling tools like start_program and stop_program. The extension '.rxe' adds concrete specificity.

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 phrase 'currently running' gives clear context for when to use this tool: when an agent needs to know what program is active. It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not guidance, but no close sibling offers the same purpose, so the context is sufficient without exclusions.

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