get-metric-metadata

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses return fields and implies read-only access. Does not mention authentication or limitations, but for a simple metadata retrieval, it's adequate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with key information, no fluff. Efficient and direct.

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?

No output schema, but description lists return fields (type, unit, description, integration), providing complete context for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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?

Only parameter metricName with no schema description. Description adds meaning by indicating it expects a metric name like 'system.cpu.user', but doesn't specify format or constraints. Schema coverage 0%, so description compensates partially.

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?

Clearly states verb 'get', resource 'metadata for a specific metric name', and what it returns (type, unit, description, integration). Distinguishes from siblings like 'get-metrics' and 'query-metrics'.

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 you need to understand what a metric measures' with a concrete example. Lacks explicit when-not to use, but given the sibling list, the use case is well-defined.

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