ps_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'optional JSON output format', which adds useful context about output behavior. However, it lacks details on permissions needed, rate limits, error conditions, or pagination. For a read-only monitoring tool with no annotations, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose ('List and monitor Heroku application dynos'), followed by specific use cases and an output format note. Every sentence earns its place, with no wasted words, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description does well by specifying use cases and output format. However, it could improve by mentioning typical return values (e.g., dyno types, states) or error handling. For a 2-parameter read tool, it's mostly complete but has minor gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (app name and JSON format flag). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('List and monitor') and resource ('Heroku application dynos'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_apps (which lists apps) and ps_restart/ps_scale (which modify dynos). It specifies the exact scope: viewing running dynos, checking status/health, monitoring process states, and verifying configurations.

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 explicitly provides four use cases (e.g., 'View all running dynos for an app', 'Check dyno status and health'), making it clear when to use this tool. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on dyno monitoring rather than app listing (list_apps) or dyno modification (ps_restart).

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