system_get_metadata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it is a GET request, which implies a read-only operation, but does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or what data is returned. The tag 'System Controller' is minimal and doesn't add behavioral context.

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 very short, consisting of the endpoint, a title, and a tag. It is front-loaded with the method and path. While concise, it could be more informative without being overly long, but the brevity is efficient.

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 it is a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides the minimum: what it does and the endpoint. However, it does not mention what 'metadata' encompasses or how it differs from other system tools, leaving gaps in understanding its role. For a simple retrieval tool, this is barely adequate.

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 the baseline is 4. No parameter information is needed, and the description does not introduce any confusion about parameters.

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 provides the HTTP method and endpoint (GET /api/system/metadata) and the title 'Get Remnawave Information', which indicates a read operation on system metadata. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like system_get_configuration or system_get_stats, and 'Remnawave Information' is vague. It states the purpose but lacks specificity and sibling differentiation.

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 use this tool versus alternatives such as system_get_configuration, system_get_health, or system_metrics. The description implies a retrieval operation but gives no context for its selection.

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