Running queries

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

With no annotations, the description must explain behavior. It conveys that this is a snapshot of currently executing queries with a few fields, implying a read-only inspection action. However, it does not explicitly state whether it is safe, whether it can be run without side effects, or how results are ordered or bounded.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the subject and then lists the key data fields. Every word contributes useful meaning, and the format is easy to parse.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the essential return fields and data source. It could include a brief note on when to inspect running queries, but it is not missing critical invocation details.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the description has no obligation to clarify parameter behavior. The baseline of 4 applies because there is simply no parameter information that could be 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 identifies a clear subject (currently executing queries), a specific source (system.processes), and the included fields (id, user, elapsed, memory). It is distinct from siblings like query or server_metrics, though it lacks an explicit action verb such as 'List' or 'Returns'.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus siblings like server_metrics or query. There are no stated exclusions, alternatives, or 'when to use' hints beyond the description itself.

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