get_run_histogram

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully convey behavior. It only states the action and result (histogram of durations) without disclosing aspects like read-only nature, required permissions, or performance implications of large date ranges or high bucket counts.

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, 17 words. Front-loaded with the action and result. No redundant or extraneous information. Highly efficient.

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 is adequate for a simple query tool with fully documented parameters, but it lacks details on the output format (e.g., bucket structure) and does not mention that it is a read operation. Given no annotations or output schema, more context could be beneficial.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are already well-documented (end_date, start_date, bucket_count with defaults). The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves a histogram of workflow run durations ('Get workflow run duration distribution as a histogram'). Verb and resource are specific. However, it does not differentiate from similar siblings like 'get_job_duration_distribution', which could cause confusion.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_run' for single run details, 'get_log_histogram' for log patterns). Does not mention context such as date range selection or typical scenarios.

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