aiworkhub_agent_list_processes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so 'READ-ONLY:' is largely redundant repetition of structured data. The description does add two genuinely new behavioral facts — results are 'latest' processes and legacy records require the full detail mode — but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or result volume beyond the limit default.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the read-only guarantee first and the parameter caveat second. Compact with no filler, though the brevity is partly under-specification rather than efficiency.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and both parameters are optional with defaults, making a correct call possible. However, the agent still cannot tell what a 'process' record represents or when the legacy/full mode applies.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It explains detail='full' (legacy records) but never contrasts it with the 'summary' default, and the `limit` parameter is completely unaddressed in both schema and description.

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?

States a verb and resource ('summarize latest processes'), but what a 'process' is in this system is never defined, and the name says 'list' while the description says 'summarize'. No sibling is named, even though the catalogue contains many list-style tools (aiworkhub_task_list, roadmap_list) that an agent could confuse it with.

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?

Only guidance given is a parameter hint ('use detail=full for legacy records'), not a when-to-use-this-vs-alternatives statement. No exclusions, prerequisites, or routing to any sibling tool are provided.

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