cluster_monitor_remote_stats

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description goes beyond that by revealing the data source: it queries object storage via MV_BOTTOMLESS_REMOTE_STATS. That signals a potentially expensive/slow external call, which is valuable behavioral context. It stops short of stating latency, cost, or return shape.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads what is measured and tucks the implementation/source note into a parenthetical. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

For a no-param, read-only monitoring call with no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient: it identifies the metric and its source. It leaves 'bottomless' as unexplained jargon and gives no hint of the result shape, but nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a no-param tool applies. No misleading parameter claims are made.

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?

States a specific measurement (bytes) and resource (each bottomless database's remote storage), which is concrete and distinct from generic monitoring. However it does not differentiate itself from close siblings like cluster_monitor_bottomless, cluster_monitor_disk, or cluster_monitor_io, so an agent must guess which of these storage-related monitors to pick.

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 parenthetical 'on demand only' hints that this is an explicit, non-automatic invocation, implicitly contrasting with continuously-reported metrics. But there is no statement of when to prefer it over the other cluster_monitor_* siblings, so usage is only implied.

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