pmg_postfix_qshape

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It explicitly states the operation is read-only and describes the return format as a list of dicts with queue-age bucket counts, which adds behavioral insight beyond schema.

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 and one prerequisite line are concise. However, the path example and return format could be slightly trimmed without losing clarity.

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 explains the output structure, but lacks context on what 'queue shape' means or how to interpret the bucket counts. With an output schema present, the description partially fulfills completeness but leaves gaps.

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 50% (only proximo_target described). The description does not elaborate on the 'node' parameter's role or constraints, failing to compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 'Get PMG Postfix queue shape (read)', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like pmg_postfix_flush by indicating read-only nature.

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?

Mentions a prerequisite ('Needs PROXIMO_PMG_* config') but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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