get_broker_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits like side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or response structure. For a data retrieval tool, the minimal description offers no insight into behavior beyond the action.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. It is concise but could be slightly more detailed without losing brevity. There is no wasted text.

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 the complexity of 4 parameters, zero annotations, and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not cover parameter usage or differentiate from similar tools. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe returns, but other gaps remain significant.

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 input schema has 4 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain the meaning of duration, from_time, or to_time, which are time-range filters. Only broker_id is obvious from context. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema structure.

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 it retrieves metrics for a specific broker, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_broker (basic info) and get_broker_details (detailed info). However, it does not specify what metrics are included (e.g., CPU, disk usage), leaving some ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_cluster_with_broker_metrics or get_all_broker_details. Sibling tools with overlapping functionality lack comparison, making selection challenging.

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