getProcfileExample

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It provides a useful placement detail ('The finalized Procfile file should be located in /.aptible/Procfile in the build Docker image') but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or describe the return format. The existence of an output schema mitigates this gap, but more detail on what the example contains would improve transparency.

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 concise and well-structured: three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence provides relevant guidance. There is no filler or repetition of schema information.

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 tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns, provides usage context (what belongs in a Procfile), and states placement requirements. No additional context is necessary for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description adds nothing about parameters, but there are none to describe, making the baseline appropriate.

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 states a specific verb+resource: 'Gets an example Procfile for defining app processes.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like getAptibleYamlExample and getEndpointProvisionExample, which serve different purposes.

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 gives explicit guidance on what does not belong in a Procfile: '1-off tasks like running migrations are better suited for processes run via .aptible.yml, and do not belong in the Procfile.' This implicitly points to an alternative, but does not name a specific sibling tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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