get_analytics_group_metadata

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), but the description adds context beyond them: 'Enterprise-gated. Returns 403 on non-Enterprise Portkey plans.' That plan/auth prerequisite and the explicit error code are genuinely useful behavioral disclosure the annotations do not convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the return shape, followed by usage, then gating. Three tight sentences with no filler; each carries information. Could be marginally trimmed by trimming the enumerated return fields, which the output schema already provides.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return values needn't be spelled out, and the description covers purpose, usage, and the Enterprise gating constraint. For a 34-param analytics tool this is largely complete, though the omission of how the group-by dimension relates to the fixed-dimension siblings leaves a small gap.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reiterates that metadata_key is required and to pass it with the time window, but this restates what the schema's required array already declares and adds little syntax or format guidance across the 34 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get a paginated metadata breakdown') and names the return shape (total_groups, group_count, metadata_groups). The phrase 'custom breakdowns like per-environment or per-feature analysis' implicitly distinguishes it from fixed-dimension siblings (group_users, group_models, group_providers), though no sibling is named outright.

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?

'Use this for custom breakdowns like per-environment or per-feature analysis' gives clear when-to-use context, and it tells the caller to pass metadata_key alongside the time window. It stops short of naming the fixed-dimension alternatives or stating when NOT to use it, so it does not reach the exclusions bar.

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