get_dbm_query_metrics

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the action and filter options. It does not indicate whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, pagination behavior, rate limits, or data retention. This lack of transparency could lead to misuse.

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 very concise at two sentences, front-loading the purpose. While it is efficient, the brevity sacrifices necessary detail for a tool with 7 parameters and no annotations. It balances well but could be slightly expanded 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?

The description lacks crucial context such as output format, pagination, required permissions, and time range formatting. Without annotations or output schema, the agent is left with insufficient information to invoke the tool correctly, especially given the complexity of 7 parameters.

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?

The description mentions four filter parameters (database type, host, query text, time range) which map to filter_db_type, filter_host, filter_query, filter_from, and filter_to in the schema. However, it omits pagination parameters (page_limit, page_cursor) and does not specify expected formats (e.g., date-time for time range). Given the 0% schema description coverage, it adds some value but is incomplete.

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 retrieves 'Database Monitoring query metrics' with filtering by specific attributes. This effectively identifies the resource and action. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-dbm-samples' which also deal with DBM data, so it loses some clarity in distinguishing itself.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other metrics tools or aggregate functions. It fails to mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support for tool selection.

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