ie_kill_orphans

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

The description discloses the scope: only recorded processes for crashed sessions, never live agents or unknown. With no annotations, this fulfills the burden well, though it could mention any potential side effects (e.g., whether it prompts or logs). Still highly transparent.

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?

Two sentences, no waste. The first sentence states the action, the second adds critical restrictions. Perfectly front-loaded and concise.

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 zero parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, scope, and constraints. It is complete for tool selection and invocation.

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?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the tool's behavior without needing parameters. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description meets that.

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 terminates IE-mode Edge / IEDriver processes for crashed sessions, distinguishing it from killing live agents or unknown processes. It uses a specific verb (terminate) and resource (orphan processes), and the exclusion of live agents differentiates it from sibling tools like ie_close.

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 states when to use (crashed ie-mcp sessions) and when not to use (live agents, unknown processes). This provides clear guidance for agent decision-making, effectively differentiating from alternatives among sibling tools.

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