read_process

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool reads stdout/stderr but does not explain blocking behavior, whether output is consumable, error handling, or any side effects. The maxChars parameter hints at truncation but is not explained.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It conveys the essential purpose efficiently.

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 lack of output schema, no description of return format, and no lifecycle context (e.g., when to call relative to start_ps/stop_process), the description is incomplete. It does not address error cases or how output is presented (e.g., text, JSON).

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?

Description does not mention either parameter (sessionId or maxChars), and schema description coverage is 0%. The agent must infer that sessionId identifies the process and maxChars limits output length. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema's type and constraints.

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 reads stdout/stderr of a process started by start_ps. It specifies the verb (reads) and resource (process output), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like start_ps, stop_process, and list_processes.

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 provides context that the tool is for processes started by start_ps but gives no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It lacks information about the process lifecycle (e.g., process must still be running).

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