list_processes

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

The description only states what the tool does, but with no annotations provided, it fails to disclose important behavioral traits such as required permissions, performance impact, or output size. For a system command, these details matter.

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 very concise: two sentences that cover purpose and output details without unnecessary words. It is appropriately front-loaded.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description provides basic functionality and output fields, but omits details like permission requirements or output format. It is adequate but not complete for a production tool.

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% with a well-described 'server' parameter. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself is sufficient. No bonus or penalty.

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 the tool's purpose: 'List all running processes' and specifies the details shown (PID, user, CPU, memory, command). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_services or list_users, which focus on other resources.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While no direct sibling exists for listing processes, the tool is straightforward, but the description lacks explicit context for when it is appropriate.

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