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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description merely restates that it 'queries' data. It does not disclose anything about output shape, pagination, or prerequisites, unlike the get_calls example which added scoping constraints.

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 that efficiently states the purpose and lists the supported metric identifiers. There is no redundancy or filler; every word contributes to the understanding of the tool.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain what the tool returns. It does not describe the return value structure or what each metric provides (e.g., time-series vs ranking). This is a significant gap for a query tool with multiple metric modes, leaving the agent to guess about outputs.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's list of metric names duplicates the enum in the 'metrica' parameter, adding no new meaning. Other parameters are fully described in the schema, so the description provides no additional value here.

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 'Queries' and the resource 'sales metrics from the database', and enumerates the specific metric identifiers (e.g., 'ventas_periodo', 'margen'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like query_catalog, which would handle catalog queries.

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 clear context that this tool is for sales metrics, which implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusion scenarios, though the list of metrics helps clarify scope. Since the context is clear, this is slightly above implied usage.

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