whats_running

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately conveys that this is a read-only live snapshot and emphasizes freshness, but it does not describe the return format, potential payload size, or any edge cases. The read-only nature is implied by 'snapshot' but not explicitly stated.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loads the core value ('Full live snapshot in one call'), and immediately lists the covered categories. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 zero-parameter snapshot tool, the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns (the four categories) and when to use it. It does not describe the exact output structure, but the enumerated categories give an agent enough context to invoke the tool and interpret the response at a high level.

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 zero parameters and an empty schema, so no parameter semantics are needed. The description appropriately focuses on the output rather than inputs, which is the baseline expectation for a parameterless tool.

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 defines the tool as a 'Full live snapshot in one call' and explicitly enumerates the included domains (agent sessions, TCP listeners, loaded daemons, system stats). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools, each of which covers only a single domain.

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 description explicitly recommends using the tool 'at session start to ground yourself in what is ACTUALLY live instead of stale memory,' which provides a clear invocation context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the 'full snapshot' phrasing implies that narrower tools exist for focused queries.

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