check_hub_running

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, indicating safe, read-only behavior. The description adds that it checks the process list, which is consistent but does not reveal further behavioral traits like whether it accesses external resources or has any side effects.

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 a single, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any extraneous words. It is appropriately sized for a simple check tool.

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?

The description lacks information about the return value. Although there is no output schema, the description should indicate what the tool returns (e.g., a boolean) to be complete. Without this, the agent cannot know what to expect from the invocation.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds no additional parameter information, which is acceptable.

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 verb 'prüft' (checks) and the resource 'Unity Hub', and specifies the method 'Prozessliste' (process list). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'launch_hub' or 'list_unity_processes' by focusing on the running status of Hub.

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 tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that this should be used before launching or after closing Hub, nor does it reference sibling tools like 'launch_hub' or 'close_hub'.

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