lattice_get_fleet_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. However, it does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, whether the request is read-only, or any side effects. For a read-only metrics tool, basic safety context is 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 a single sentence that is efficient and front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word earns its place with no 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose. However, the lack of behavioral details (no annotations) and omission of any return format or aggregation type makes it only moderately 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 100% (1 parameter with description). The description adds 'over a time range', which aligns with the 'range' parameter but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema's example. Baseline is 3 given high coverage.

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 'Get' and the resource 'aggregated fleet-wide CPU, memory, disk and network metrics'. It specifies the scope (fleet-wide) and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'lattice_get_worker_metrics' (per-worker) and 'lattice_get_container_metrics' (per-container).

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 the tool is for fleet-wide metrics over a time range, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention any exclusions. The context from sibling tool names helps, but the description alone lacks explicit usage guidance.

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