proc_kill

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose behavioral traits like destructiveness, permissions required, or side effects. It only states 'Kill' and default signal, but omits that this terminates a process, what happens to child processes, or that certain signals may be more forceful.

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 with two short sentences. No unnecessary words, and it front-loads the core purpose and key default value.

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 no output schema and low schema coverage, the description should provide more context about expected outcomes, errors, or return values. It does not mention what happens upon success or failure, or that permissions may be needed.

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 schema has 33% description coverage (only 'signal' described). The description adds that signal defaults to 15 (SIGTERM) but does not mention 'session_id' or 'pid' beyond their names. It fails to explain the role of 'session_id' which is required.

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 'Kill a process by PID' which is a specific verb-action on a well-defined resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'proc_list' which lists processes, and other process management tools.

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 (e.g., when to use a different signal or prerequisites like knowing the PID). It only mentions the default signal without context.

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