Get CPU Usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful content about what is returned (load averages, core count, top snapshot), but does not state that the snapshot is a point-in-time reading or whether values are averaged over intervals, which matters for interpreting 'load averages'.

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 no filler; the resource and return payload are stated immediately and nothing is wasted.

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, parameterless, non-destructive read with no output schema, listing the three returned data groups is enough for an agent to call it correctly. Only the absence of any hint about the overlap with get_top_processes keeps it from being fully complete.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. Schema coverage is moot here since the properties object is empty.

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 specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('CPU') and enumerates the returned fields (load averages, core count, top snapshot). It is clearly distinguishable from get_memory_usage and get_disk_usage by resource, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with sibling get_top_processes, which overlaps with the 'top snapshot' phrase.

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 call this versus the many sibling diagnostics (get_system_info, get_top_processes, list_processes). The description gives no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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