pbs_metrics_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses READ-ONLY nature, a behavioral quirk (null return type despite real data), and best-effort operation. This provides necessary transparency for agent decision-making.

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 somewhat verbose with internal references to module docstrings and other tools. While the main purpose is front-loaded, the extra metadata could be streamlined for better 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?

Given the input schema fully describes parameters and the description explains the return data and its quirk, the tool is adequately documented. The output schema presence helps, and the description covers necessary context for a metrics retrieval tool.

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% for 3 parameters. The description does not add additional details about parameters beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns PBS backup server metrics including host CPU/memory/network and per-datastore performance telemetry, using specific verb 'return' and resource 'metrics'. It distinguishes from siblings by detailing the data content.

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 indicates it is READ-ONLY and mentions 'REVIEWED_TRUSTED' context, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like pbs_datastore_status or pbs_node_rrd. No 'when not to use' or exclusion criteria are provided.

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