pbs_datastore_rrd

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It declares 'READ-ONLY' (safe, no writes), notes a schema quirk ('declares returns:null despite real data — best-effort dict passthrough'), and states it is 'REVIEWED_TRUSTED (rrddata precedent)'. This adequately discloses behavioral traits.

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 three sentences, packed with essential information (purpose, sibling, schema quirk, trust, config). It is concise but technical in parts; could be slightly more structured but mostly 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?

Given the complexity (4 params, required 3, output schema exists, no annotations), the description covers purpose, read-only nature, sibling parallelism, schema discrepancy, trust level, and config needs. It lacks details on error handling or output format, but the output schema covers return structure. Overall sufficient for an agent.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning to parameters (store, cf, timeframe) beyond what the schema provides. It could have explained cf values or typical usage, but the schema descriptions are already clear.

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 the tool's purpose: 'datastore stats telemetry (I/O, usage over time)'. It distinguishes itself as the datastore-level parallel of pbs_node_rrd, providing a direct sibling reference.

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 marks the tool as 'READ-ONLY' and mentions it is the datastore counterpart of pbs_node_rrd, guiding when to use it (datastore-level). It also notes the configuration requirement 'Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config'. However, it does not explicitly exclude other tools or provide when-not-to-use scenarios.

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