IT Tools MCP Server

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false (though this seems questionable for a display tool), but the description adds the key behavioral detail that it shows a 'snapshot' rather than continuous monitoring. However, it doesn't address potential side effects, refresh behavior, or output format details that would help an agent understand what to expect.

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 extremely concise (5 words) and front-loaded with the core functionality. Every word earns its place: 'Display' (action), 'system processes' (resource), and '(snapshot)' (important behavioral context).

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides the basic purpose but lacks details about output format, refresh behavior, or how it differs from similar tools. The annotations provide minimal information (just title and questionable readOnlyHint), leaving significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline would be 3. The description appropriately acknowledges this by not attempting to describe non-existent parameters, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose rather than parameter details.

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 'Display system processes (snapshot)' clearly states the verb ('display') and resource ('system processes'), with 'snapshot' providing useful context about the nature of the output. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'ps' or 'system_info', which might also show system information.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ps' (which appears in the sibling list) or 'system_info'. There's no mention of prerequisites, timing considerations, or comparative advantages/disadvantages.

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