Metis — Load Tool Group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the entire burden. It states 'Load every tool' but does not explain what 'load' entails (e.g., side effects, resource usage, reversibility). This is insufficient for behavioral transparency.

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, both essential. The first sentence states the core action, the second provides usage guidance and examples. No filler or redundancy.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description is minimally complete. It covers purpose and usage, but lacks details on what happens after loading. Adequate but could be improved.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It describes the 'group' parameter as a 'named group' and points to list_tool_groups for possible values, but does not specify format or constraints. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 ('Load every tool in a named group at once') and provides concrete examples (group 'data', 'specialist'). It references sibling tool 'list_tool_groups' for finding group names, aiding differentiation.

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 advises use for multiple related operations and gives concrete example scenarios. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context and reference to list_tool_groups provide sufficient guidance.

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