get_agent_metrics

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that the tool returns data for the user's own agent account and lists the output fields (balance, task counts, spend, reputation, ratings). It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but the nature of a dashboard implies it is a safe read operation, which is sufficient for transparency.

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 composed of two tightly written sentences. The first sentence lists all key outputs, and the second provides usage guidance and an alternative. Every word is necessary, and the structure is front-loaded with the most important 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 output schema, the description fully explains the return values (balance, task counts by status, spend, reputation, ratings) and provides usage context. The tool has no parameters and simple behavior, so the description is complete and sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema has no parameters, so the description adds value by explaining what the tool returns without needing parameter details. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description effectively compensates by detailing the output, which aids understanding.

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 explicitly states the tool provides a 'full performance dashboard' listing specific account metrics, which clearly identifies the purpose. It differentiates from sibling tool 'get_reputation' by specifying the scope (own agent vs. any agent) and level of detail.

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 tells when to use this tool ('operational reporting or when a user asks for an account summary') and when not to, by directing to 'get_reputation' for quick reliability checks on any agent. This provides strong guidance for an AI agent to select correctly.

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