Procesy w tle serwera

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: what background processes are, that passing 'process' returns a log, and the server-level scoping in API v2.

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 concise, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence earns its place. The note about old Forge terminology and API v2 scoping is useful context without bloat.

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 read-only list tool with full schema parameter coverage and safety annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral nuances: what is listed, how to get a log, and server-level ownership. No output schema exists, but the return format is not critical for a list operation of this kind.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the purpose of the 'process' parameter (returns the log of that process) and clarifying the semantic scope of the list operation (server-wide, not per-site).

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 verb 'Wypisuje' (lists) and the resource 'procesy w tle uruchomione na serwerze', defining exactly what the tool does. It adds helpful clarification that these are queue workers and long-running commands, and distinguishes them from per-site entities.

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 gives practical usage guidance: pass the 'process' argument to view a specific process log, and notes that in API v2 background processes belong to the server, not a site. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or state when not to use this one, but the context is sufficient for a list operation.

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