td_get_server_metrics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds behavioral context by listing the types of metrics returned and stating it returns a JSON envelope, which is helpful beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that clearly state the action and return format. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with key information.

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, comprehensive annotations, and an output schema (mentioned), the description is complete. It covers what the tool returns and the scope of metrics, sufficient for agent invocation.

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 tool has no parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-specific info, which is acceptable. Baseline 4 is appropriate as no further semantics are needed.

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 'Get MCP server runtime metrics' and lists specific categories (telemetry, events, streams, safety, snapshots, jobs), making the purpose explicit. It distinguishes from siblings as no other sibling tool is about server 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?

The description implies usage for retrieving runtime metrics, and with zero parameters, usage is straightforward. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives, though no direct alternatives exist among siblings.

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