get_script_metrics

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only states 'Get' and returns a 'Metrics summary,' but does not confirm read-only nature, auth requirements, or side effects. The minimal description fails to provide sufficient behavioral clarity.

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 relatively short and includes an Args section with parameter explanations and a Returns line. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, the Args section repeats parameter names unnecessarily, so it could be slightly more concise.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description only says 'Metrics summary,' leaving the agent without knowledge of the return format or content. With 4 parameters and no schema coverage, the description should provide more detail about what metrics are returned to be complete.

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 adds essential meaning to each parameter: it explains user_google_email, script_id, metrics_granularity (with allowed values), and metrics_filter_json (optional JSON). This significantly enhances understanding beyond the schema's type-only definitions.

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 Apps Script metrics for a script,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_script_content or list_script_processes. However, it does not specify what type of metrics (e.g., execution time, errors) or scope, leaving some ambiguity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no explicit contexts, prerequisites, or comparisons with sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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