get_resource_monitoring

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It states returns JSON with cluster summary and hypervisor details, implying a read operation. However, lacks details on performance, caching, or authorization requirements, which would be helpful for a monitoring tool.

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 concise with a clear headline, bulleted functions, usage guidance, and return description. No redundant information; every section serves a purpose.

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 no parameters and a described output schema, the description provides complete context: what it monitors, when to use, and what the response contains. No gaps identified.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds value by explaining the output format and included functions, beyond what the empty schema provides.

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 tool monitors real-time resource usage across the OpenStack cluster, listing specific functions like CPU, memory, and storage monitoring. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on other resources.

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 says 'Use when user requests resource monitoring, capacity planning, usage analysis, or performance monitoring.' While it doesn't mention when not to use, the guidance is clear and covers common scenarios.

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