GPU PromQL Reference

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It states 'no live query', indicating the tool is safe, read-only, and returns static markdown. It doesn't detail idempotency or permissions, but the key behavioral trait (no side effects) is communicated.

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 succinctly states the tool's purpose and usage. It is front-loaded with essential information, no fluff.

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?

For a simple reference tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the content (DCGM/GPU PromQL), the format (markdown), and the behavioral constraint (no live query). An agent can use it effectively.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema covers 100%. The description adds meaning by specifying the content scope (DCGM and GPU PromQL examples). Baseline for 0 params is 4, and this is met.

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 provides a markdown reference for DCGM and GPU-related PromQL examples. It specifies 'no live query', distinguishing it from execution tools. Among siblings, it stands out as a static reference, not a renderer or lister.

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 explicitly says 'Pair with prometheus_query for execution', giving clear usage guidance on how to use this tool in conjunction with another. It implies that this tool is for reference, not execution, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or provide when-not-to-use scenarios.

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