process_params

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

The annotations already establish readOnly=true and destructive=false. The description adds useful beyond-that behavior: it returns the default toSource parameter listing, not current session state, and that this is the exact format needed for apply_process.

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?

One sentence, no filler. The primary notion ('parameter listing (toSource)') is front-loaded and the practical purpose follows immediately. Every word earns its place.

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 one-string-parameter read-only helper without an output schema, the description is largely complete: it states the input domain, the return style, and the downstream consumer. It omits failure conditions or session prerequisites, but those are secondary for this simple 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry the meaning of the single 'process' parameter. It does indicate that the parameter names a PixInsight process, which is meaningful, but it offers no examples or expected naming conventions. This is adequate, not rich.

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 names a specific resource ('parameter listing of a PixInsight process') and a specific function ('discover exact parameter names'), then ties it directly to apply_process. This distinguishes it from every sibling tool, none of which is about parameter discovery.

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 phrase 'exact parameter names for apply_process' clearly marks this as the discovery/preparation step before calling apply_process. It does not enumerate alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong enough for an agent to know when it applies.

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