reports_anon_rss_swap_memory_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers almost nothing: no mention of permissions/auth, pagination despite a pageToken parameter, result size limits, or whether the operation is read-only. Only the word 'Query' weakly implies a read.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, which is structurally good. But the terseness here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined economy, so it does not earn a high score.

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 an 8-parameter, nested-object tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is far too thin. Only the schema-level note that this is a 'Standard MetricSet query body' hints at semantics, and nothing explains the body's fields or the return shape.

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?

Eight parameters with 0% per-parameter description coverage, and the description names none of them. Fields like filter, metrics, dimensions, userCohort, pageSize, and the nested timelineSpec receive no explanation in either the description or the schema properties.

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?

States a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('anonymous RSS + swap memory usage timeline'), which is far more informative than a tautology. However, it does not distinguish this from its near-identical sibling reports_anon_rss_swap_memory_get, so an agent cannot tell the two apart from the description alone.

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 statement of when to use this query variant versus the sibling 'get' variant, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The sentence is purely descriptive of subject matter, leaving routing entirely to inference.

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