get_top_processes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool retrieves top processes by CPU or memory, but it does not disclose whether it returns both resources or allows selection, the sorting order, the output format, or any potential side effects. This is insufficient 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?

The description is a single sentence that efficiently states the core purpose. It is appropriately front-loaded but could potentially include a bit more detail without becoming verbose.

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 the absence of an output schema, the description should explain what the return value contains (e.g., process IDs, names, resource usage details). It lacks this information, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 input schema covers the single parameter 'limit' with 100% coverage, describing its type and default. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gets the top N processes by CPU or memory usage on the current system. It uses a specific verb ('获取') and resource ('进程'), and distinguishes from sibling tools which target different aspects (system metrics, network ping, Docker status).

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 implies usage when top resource-consuming processes are needed, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings, nor does it mention when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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