edubase_post_metrics_custom

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

While annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive operation, the description fails to disclose key behavioral traits. Notably, the value parameter supports increment syntax (e.g., '+5'), but the description simply says 'Update a custom metric' without hinting at relative updates. It also doesn't mention whether updates are upserts or require existing metrics.

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, compact sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. It is not overly verbose, but could be improved by including brief behavioral notes without losing conciseness.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema, the description omits important context about the increment capability and the nature of a 'custom metric'. Given the tool has a special parameter behavior, the description is incomplete and insufficient for effective use.

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 includes descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not add additional meaning. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides adequate details.

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 action ('Update') and resource ('a custom metric'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings as there are no other metric-specific post tools. However, it lacks context about what constitutes a custom metric in this domain.

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 vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or how it relates to other tools like get_metrics (if it existed). The description is too terse to guide agent decision-making.

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