mp_cleanup

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true), the description details dry-run behavior, signal types (SIGKILL vs SIGTERM), and safety guarantees (never touches current process or alive parents). This is excellent behavioral context.

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?

Three sentences: main purpose, defaults and modes, safety guarantee. Every sentence is informative and structured front-loaded with the most important information.

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 two boolean parameters with defaults, destructive annotation, and an output schema (not shown), the description fully covers behavior, safety, and repeatability. No apparent gaps for an agent to misuse the 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?

Both boolean parameters (dry_run, force) are clearly explained with their default values and effects. Schema provides defaults but no semantic context, so description adds significant value.

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 explicitly states it kills orphaned thread-keeper processes with specific conditions (parent gone and heartbeat stale > 5 minutes). It uniquely identifies the tool's function among a large set of sibling tools.

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?

Clearly describes when to use (orphaned process cleanup) and how to use (dry-run by default, force option). Implicitly states when not to use (never touches current process or living parent processes). Does not explicitly mention alternatives, but no sibling tool appears to serve the same purpose.

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