observability.query_metrics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's addition of 'bounded' adds some context about scope but does not significantly expand on behavioral traits (e.g., what happens when metrics are not found, pagination, or limits).

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 short (8 words) and front-loaded, but it sacrifices completeness for brevity. It could be expanded to include parameter hints or usage context without losing conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is insufficient for a tool with 5 parameters and zero schema descriptions. It fails to explain key concepts like 'bounded' and the meaning of parameters, leaving the tool underdefined for effective 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but mentions none of the 5 parameters. It does not explain 'at', 'to', 'from', 'stepMs', or 'queryTemplate', leaving agents to infer meaning from names and schemas alone.

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 states 'Run a bounded named metrics query', which clearly identifies the action (run) and resource (metrics query) with modifiers. It is specific enough to differentiate from sibling tools like active_alerts or health_snapshot, but does not explicitly compare alternatives.

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. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or conditions that would help an agent decide.

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