kill_process

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

While the description implies a destructive action (terminating a process), it lacks details on permissions required, potential risks (e.g., killing critical system processes), or what happens on failure. With no annotations, this gap is significant.

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 sentence, efficiently conveying the core action. However, it could be more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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 annotations, no output schema, and two parameters (one optional), the description is insufficient. It does not cover return values, error behavior, or the effect of the 'force' parameter.

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 description does not explain the parameters: 'pid' is not defined as process ID, and 'force' is not mentioned at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add any value beyond the bare schema.

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 explicitly states the action 'terminate' and the resource 'process with specified PID', making the tool's purpose clear and distinct from siblings like run_command or session_stop.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., session_stop for sessions), nor any prerequisites or warnings about killing processes.

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