post_metrics

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool submits metrics, but omits details about authorization, idempotency, rate limits, side effects, or error handling common to mutation tools.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The action is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides contextual guidance. Ideal conciseness for a straightforward tool.

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 output schema and annotations, the description is adequate for a simple metric submission but lacks context on expected return values, confirmation messages, or how it relates to the batch sibling and other tools.

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 schema already documents each parameter. The description adds a helpful directive to select relevant fields per project type, which provides some additional context beyond the schema, but does not explain parameter relationships or constraints.

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 states 'Submit a metrics payload for the current Top.gg project', clearly indicating the action (submit) and resource (metrics for a Top.gg project). The name 'post_metrics' and the sibling 'post_metrics_batch' imply differentiation, but the description does not explicitly distinguish between them.

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 says 'Provide the fields relevant to your project type,' which gives some guidance on parameter selection, but it does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'post_metrics_batch', nor does it include when-not or prerequisites.

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