imgui_show_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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool toggles visibility but doesn't describe whether metrics include garbage collection/state inspector, whether the window persists across frames or snapshots, or the effect on performance while enabled. For a toggle tool with zero annotation coverage, these gaps are notable.

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?

A single efficient sentence that earns its place—states the action, the resource, and the window's purpose. No filler or redundancy. Could slightly expand on behavioral details but as a concise statement it is well-structured.

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 toggle tool with high schema coverage and a single required boolean, the description is largely adequate for invocation. However, with zero annotations, no output schema, and a debug/instrumentation tool that has more behavioral nuance (window persistence, frame effects, whether it modifies UI state), a bit more behavioral context would round it out. A simple toggle arguably doesn't need more, but the debugging nature warrants light additional disclosure.

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 schema already documents the single 'show' boolean parameter. The description adds minimal value beyond that—it implies this boolean controls visibility state but doesn't clarify edge cases like whether 'false' hides or closes the window permanently. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the definition.

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+resource ('Show or hide the ImGui metrics/debug window') and adds context about what the tool shows (draw calls, vertices, etc.). It distinguishes itself from related tools like imgui_show_demo, imgui_show_about, and imgui_show_style_editor since it names the specific window and content.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't explain when a user would want the metrics window as opposed to the demo/style editor/about windows, nor does it note that this controls a debugging overlay distinct from normal window management. The context is implied by the tool name but no exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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