agent-tool

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

With no annotations provided, description carries full burden. It discloses what data is returned but lacks details on output format (JSON vs string), potential errors, or permission requirements. Mentions temporal behavior of CPU measurement (over time), providing minimal viable behavioral context for a read operation.

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?

Two sentences total. First sentence front-loads the return value with specific categories. Second sentence efficiently links parameter value range to functional outcome. Zero redundancy or wasted words.

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 single-parameter read tool without output schema, the description appropriately compensates by listing the five specific information categories returned. Meets completeness needs for this complexity level, though output format specification would elevate it to 5.

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%, establishing baseline 3. Description adds value by framing the parameter's purpose as 'to measure CPU usage over time,' providing user intent beyond the schema's technical constraints (0=snapshot, max 20). Accurately reflects that CPU usage requires duration >=1 without contradicting 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?

Description states specific action ('Returns') and enumerates exact resources covered (OS, CPU cores, RAM, disk space, CPU usage). Distinct from siblings like file_info (file metadata), memtool (memory operations), and proclist (processes) by focusing on static hardware/OS characteristics.

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?

Provides implicit usage guidance by explaining that duration_sec (1-20) is used 'to measure CPU usage over time,' which hints at when to use values >=1 versus 0. However, lacks explicit when-to-use guidance comparing to siblings or stating prerequisites.

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