get_job_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 describes the response shape and parameter behavior but does not explicitly state read-only nature, authentication needs, or data freshness. However, the response structure is detailed enough to compensate partially.

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 moderately sized with a clear structure: purpose, usage guidelines, response shape, and args. Every sentence is valuable, though the response shape 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?

Given one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is quite complete. It covers purpose, usage, parameter details, and response shape. It could add more about potential limits or performance but is adequate.

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 schema has one parameter (hours) with 0% description coverage, but the description adds a default (24) and max (720) value, providing meaning beyond the schema. For a single parameter, this is sufficient.

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 it returns job execution SLIs (throughput, success rate, latency) for the last N hours, broken down by action type. This is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_job (individual) and list_jobs (listing).

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?

Explicitly tells when to call this tool (health/performance questions) and when not to (individual status -> get_job or list_jobs). Also provides clear context for use.

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