sac_monitoring_get

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It implies a read operation ('Get') but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or response characteristics. This is insufficient for reliable agent invocation.

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 and concise. While it could be slightly expanded for clarity, it is appropriately sized for a simple tool with one parameter.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description provides the basic purpose but lacks details on return data, filtering options, or any constraints. It is minimally complete but could offer more contextual information.

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 covers 100% of the single parameter with a description 'Model ID'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or usage guidance beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'monitoring data for a model', making the purpose understandable. However, it does not specify what kind of monitoring data (e.g., metrics, logs) or provide any distinct differentiation from sibling tools, though no direct monitoring sibling exists.

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 usage guidelines are provided. There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites mentioned, and no context for when it is appropriate or inappropriate to invoke.

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