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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The word 'browse' suggests read-only behavior, but it does not explicitly state non-destructive or idempotent nature. For a simple listing tool, this is adequate but could be improved with explicit statements about permissions or side effects.

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?

Single sentence, no verbose explanations, perfectly concise. Every word earns its place.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what the tool does and what it returns. It is complete for its simplicity.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter info, but none is needed. It correctly prioritizes describing the output content over parameters that don't exist.

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 tool's purpose: browsing a metric catalogue with specific items (metric keys, formats, domains, dimensions). It uses a unique verb 'browse' and resource 'metric catalogue', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'list_dimensions' or 'get_binding'.

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 implies usage for exploring available metrics but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Given the presence of sibling tools, some direction on when to use this instead of more specific listing tools would be helpful.

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