list_metrics

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context; it does indicate a read-only enumeration of all certified metrics, but it does not disclose pagination, volume, filtering semantics, or what 'certified' means. This is adequate for a simple list operation but leaves some behavioral details unstated.

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?

One compact sentence with the action front-loaded and the returned fields listed concisely. There is no filler or redundant information.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it states the scope and returned fields. It could briefly clarify when to use a sibling tool or define 'certified', but nothing essential for invoking the tool is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter ambiguity to document. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter semantics are needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('every certified metric') and enumerates the returned fields ('description, owner, and synonyms'). This distinguishes it from siblings like describe_metric (singular) and list_entities (different resource).

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 wording implies this is the tool for obtaining the full catalog of certified metrics, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer alternatives such as describe_metric or query_metric. There are no exclusions or when-not-to-use notes, so guidance is only implicit.

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