get_process_info

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

No annotations provided. The description mentions it provides detailed info but does not disclose potential performance impact, permissions, or blocking behavior. It is adequate but could be richer for a diagnostic tool.

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 front-loads the key info. No unnecessary words, every part contributes to understanding.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not detail return values. The tool is simple (one parameter), and the description covers the core functionality. Could mention that pid must be a running process.

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% with no description for the 'pid' parameter. The description does not elaborate on the parameter beyond the tool's name. For a single integer parameter, it is somewhat obvious, but the description adds no value over the schema.

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 it provides detailed info for a specific PID, listing types of info (cmdline, cpu/mem, threads, open files). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_process_top' (summary) and 'find_processes' (list PIDs).

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 description implies use when needing detailed info on a single PID. Context signals show siblings, but no explicit when-not or alternatives. However, the purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer usage.

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