db_processes

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

With no annotations, the description must carry safety information. The verb 'Show' does imply a read-only listing, and '(admin)' signals privileged scope, which is useful. However, it does not specify whether these are database processes, what data is returned, or any side-effect-free guarantee beyond the word 'Show'.

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 four words with no filler and the key verb is front-loaded. It states the action, resource, and scope in a tightly packed way appropriate for such a simple 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?

Because there are no parameters and an output schema exists, the description does not need to document return values. However, it never explicitly says these are database processes rather than general server processes, and it offers no sibling or alternative context, leaving some room for an agent to misidentify the tool's exact domain.

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?

This tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so the description has nothing extra to explain. The 0-parameter baseline applies and no semantic information is missing.

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 uses the specific verb 'Show' and identifies the resource as the process list, with an admin scope. It also reads as a non-mutating operation, distinguishing it from db_kill_process, though the database context depends on the tool name rather than the description itself.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool instead of nearby db_* tools or how it relates to process termination. The parenthetical 'admin' hints at permission needs, but no conditions, alternatives, or exclusions are given.

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