kill

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

Beyond destructiveHint annotation, describes destructive potential ('can terminate or alter process execution') and safety features: 'Use --dry_run to preview the signal without sending. Requires --allow_signal for actual signal delivery; fails safely otherwise.'

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?

Five concise sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, no redundant information. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

Covers purpose, safety, usage, and alternatives well. Lacks details on return values or error behavior, but output schema is absent so not required. Minor gap for completeness.

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 100% so baseline is 3. Description adds integrative context on using dry_run and allow_signal together, but does not elaborate on signal names or format beyond 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?

States 'Plan or send a signal to a process by PID' with clear verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools: 'Not for process listing — use ps or pidof externally. See also nohup.'

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?

Explicitly says when to use ('signal, terminate, or restart processes in agent workflows') and when not to ('Not for process listing'). Provides alternative tools (ps, pidof, nohup) and mentions dry_run and allow_signal safety options.

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