list_processes

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

The description reveals that the tool returns a simple list with PID, agent type, and status for each process, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as performance characteristics, rate limits, or whether it blocks. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, but it only minimally covers behavior.

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, front-loaded with the core action, and no unnecessary words. Straightforward and efficient.

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 simple list operation with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the return format and scope. However, it could mention that no detailed process information is provided (e.g., no resource usage) or that it is read-only, but overall it is sufficient.

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?

The tool has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by definition. The description naturally adds no parameter information, but the baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 lists all running and completed AI agent processes, specifying the resource (processes) and action (list). It distinguishes from sibling tools like cleanup_processes, kill_process, etc., by focusing on listing rather than modifying or inspecting.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use 'peek' or 'get_result'). There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context for use.

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