query_metrics_range

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It declares a read operation (query) but does not disclose potential side effects, idempotency, rate limits, or authorization needs. The return type is described, but deeper behavioral traits are missing.

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 structured with Args and Returns sections, no redundant sentences. Every sentence adds value, and the format is easily scannable.

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 and the presence of an output schema, the description covers inputs and outputs well. It could briefly contrast with query_metrics for clarity, but overall it is sufficient for a straightforward query tool.

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?

The description explains each parameter in detail (e.g., start/end as RFC 3339 or Unix timestamp, step as duration string or float seconds). The schema lacks descriptions, so the description adds critical meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Run a PromQL range query against Thanos.' It specifies the resource (Thanos), action (range query), and distinguishes from sibling tools like query_metrics which likely perform instant queries.

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 implies use for range queries vs. instant queries, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like query_metrics or Loki-based tools. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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