list_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists every supported metric, implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as response size, pagination, or authentication requirements. This is adequate for a simple list operation, but not rich.

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 a single sentence that leads with the verb and clearly states the scope. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (no input parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does. It explains the content of the listing (description, required/optional params), making it complete for its context. The output schema can handle return value details.

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 zero parameters, and the input schema is empty, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics. It does clarify that the output includes parameter information for each metric, which is helpful context beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('every supported metric'), and specifies what is included (description, required and optional params). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like calculate_metric which perform calculations rather than listing metadata.

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: to discover available metrics and their parameters. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor mention any prerequisites or exclusions. For a simple listing tool, the context is fairly clear, but no formal guidance is provided.

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