get_service_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the metrics retrieved (CPU, RAM, disk, bandwidth) which implies a read-only operation, but does not explicitly declare it as such. It also lacks details on authentication or rate limits, though these are likely standard for the API. The description is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 two sentences: the first clearly states what the tool does, and the second gives usage examples. Every sentence is meaningful, with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers all essential context: what it retrieves, for which service, with aggregation period, and example use cases. It is complete for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of the tool (returning time series) and providing examples of use, which helps the agent understand the context beyond just the parameter names and enums.

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 'Get resource metrics (CPU / RAM / disk / bandwidth time series) for a single service.' It specifies the verb (get), the resource (metrics for a service), and the scope (time series). Among sibling tools, none focus on metrics, so it distinguishes itself effectively.

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 provides concrete use cases: 'Use to answer "is my server busy?" or "how much bandwidth have I used?".' This gives clear guidance on when to use the tool. It does not explicitly exclude scenarios, but the examples are strong enough for practical use.

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