managed_process_list

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

With no annotations, description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'report-only' implying no destructive actions. However, it does not mention pagination, performance implications, or access requirements. Minimal but acceptable.

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?

Two sentences, no redundant information. Front-loaded with the core action and scope. Every word is useful.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly adequate except for missing parameter documentation. It covers the basic purpose and read-only nature.

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 single parameter 'include_exited' has no description in the schema (0% coverage). The description does not explain what this boolean does, leaving the agent unaware of its effect on the output.

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?

Clearly states it lists processes launched through cpe-run lifecycle management. The phrase 'report-only' indicates read-only nature. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like managed_lifecycle_report or managed_process_explain.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools exist for similar purposes (e.g., managed_lifecycle_report, managed_process_explain) but no comparison or exclusions provided.

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