get_nodes_metrics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the '[READ]' tag merely repeats that. Beyond the endpoint path (GET /api/system/nodes/metrics), the description discloses nothing about scope, auth, cost, or what the metrics represent.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but the first line duplicates the tool name and the second line only supplies verb+path. Minimal waste, but also minimal value per sentence.

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 no output schema, the description carries the burden of saying what is returned, and it says nothing. For a read endpoint amid a dense cluster of node-metrics/statistics siblings, this leaves the agent unable to predict the result shape or choose correctly.

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 takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond what the empty schema already states.

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 is essentially the tool name restated ('Get Nodes Metrics') plus an HTTP verb/path hint. It never explains what metrics are returned or how this differs from near-identical siblings such as get_nodes_statistics, get_node_usage, or get_stats_nodes_usage, so an agent cannot disambiguate from the text alone.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus the many overlapping node/statistics tools in the sibling list. No context, no exclusions, no alternatives are given.

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