kill_process

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds 'forcefully terminate' and 'use with caution', which provides minimal additional behavioral context beyond the annotation. It does not detail side effects or permissions.

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 with three sentences. The third sentence referencing invocation might be extraneous but does not significantly detract from clarity.

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?

The description covers the basic action and destructiveness, but lacks information about return values, prerequisites, or effects on process output. Given the simplicity of the tool and lack of output schema, it is adequate but not 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 only parameter 'pid' has no schema description (0% coverage). The description mentions 'by PID' but does not explain what a PID is or how to obtain it, adding little value beyond the schema's type definition.

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 'Terminate' and the resource 'running process by PID'. It is specific, but does not differentiate from sibling 'force_terminate', which appears to have similar functionality.

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 advises caution but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like force_terminate or list_processes. The mention of invocation reference is not usage guidance.

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