get_llm_filters

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It implies a read-only metadata operation but does not mention authorization, error conditions, response format, or how the site_global_key parameter affects results. Minimal behavioral context is provided.

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 with no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete. It conveys the core purpose but omits necessary context about parameters and usage, making it borderline between concise and inadequate.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description is too terse. It does not explain the parameter, the return structure, or the tool's role in relation to other analytics tools, leaving an agent with insufficient information for correct invocation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the sole parameter site_global_key. The description does not mention this parameter or explain its meaning, forcing the agent to infer from the name alone. No added semantic value.

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 the tool returns available filter values for LLM analytics and lists the specific dimensions (channels, LLM names, metrics). This distinguishes it from the sibling llm_analytics tool. However, it lacks an explicit verb, relying on the tool name for the action.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives or how it relates to llm_analytics. The description implies a supporting role but does not state prerequisites, sequencing, or exclusion criteria.

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