codex_app_process

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

The description discloses that the tool is 'experimental unsandboxed' and requires a special environment variable, which is useful context. However, with no annotations, it fails to mention the potentially destructive nature of actions like kill or write, or any other side effects. This is insufficient for a process-control tool.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence of moderate length. It packs essential context (experimental, unsandboxed, access requirement) without wasting words, though it is terse to the point of being under-specified.

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?

With 13 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this one-sentence description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the actions, handle semantics, stream behavior, timeout handling, or any return values, making it inadequate for an agent to use confidently.

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 0%, and the description does not mention any of the 13 parameters, including the required 'action' and 'processHandle'. It provides no meaning beyond the schema, so the agent gets no help understanding what each parameter does or how they relate.

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 states 'Control experimental unsandboxed app-server process/* sessions,' which identifies the resource (process sessions) and a general action (control). It also includes important context about being experimental and unsandboxed, but the verb is broad and it does not differentiate from sibling tools like codex_app_runtime or codex_app_command.

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 a prerequisite (requires CODEX_APP_MCP_ALLOW_FULL_ACCESS=1) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no exclusions or alternative tool references, leaving the agent without clear decision criteria.

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