get_anr_rate

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

Without annotations, the description explains it is a read operation (fetch), lists the data returned, and notes the threshold. It lacks details on permissions or rate limits, but is sufficient for a non-destructive fetch.

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 concise (few sentences plus args list), front-loads key functionality, and has no redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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?

While there is no output schema, the description covers the main return fields. It could be more precise about the data format, but is adequate for a simple metric tool with low complexity.

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 includes an Args section that elaborates on all three parameters (package_name format, days default/max, version_code optional), compensating for the 0% schema coverage.

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 'Fetch ANR rate from Android Vitals' and specifies the returned metrics (anrRate, userPerceivedAnrRate, distinctUsers). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_crash_rate or get_vitals_summary.

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 mentions a performance threshold (userPerceivedAnrRate > 0.47% may cause penalties), which helps interpret the data, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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