get_process_list

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

No annotations exist, but description discloses the tool is for retrieving process information, implying a read-only operation, and lists the returned fields. No behavioral traits beyond that are hidden, though additional details like authentication or performance impact are omitted.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose and output fields, second explains parameter usage. No wasted words; front-loaded with essential 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?

Given a single optional parameter and an existing output schema, the description covers what the tool does and how to control output size. It is complete for most use cases, though it could mention any prerequisites like OS support or permissions.

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 description explains the sole parameter 'top_n' as a limit for the number of processes, adding semantic context beyond the schema (which only provides a title and default). This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves running processes with specific fields (PID, user, memory, CPU usage), distinctly separating it from sibling tools like get_cpu_usage or get_memory_usage which focus on system-level stats.

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?

Provides guidance on using the 'top_n' parameter to limit results and notes default value, but does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool versus alternatives, though context implies it for process listing.

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