get_metrics

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Query,' implying read-only, but does not specify side effects, rate limits, required permissions, or data volume limits. The lack of detail increases uncertainty for an AI agent.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is concise. However, it could be slightly expanded to provide more value without becoming verbose.

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 absence of an output schema, annotations, and the presence of 5 parameters (4 required), the description fails to explain return values, pagination, error handling, or prerequisites. The agent must infer critical context, making the description incomplete.

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%, so each parameter has a description in the schema (e.g., 'Metric name to query,' 'Start time in ISO 8601 format'). The tool description adds no further semantic detail beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for well-documented parameters.

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 uses a clear verb-resource pair ('Query Bluematador metrics data') and distinguishes from sibling tools, which are CRUD operations for integrations, notifications, etc. However, it could be more specific about what kind of metrics (e.g., historical, real-time) or the scope of data.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While sibling tools are unrelated to querying metrics, the description does not clarify prerequisites or context (e.g., whether a specific integration is needed). Usage is implied but not detailed.

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