get_usage_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It implies a read operation by saying 'Return', but does not state side effects, permission requirements, or semantics of the snapshot token. The phrase 'content-free' hints at output characteristics but not safety or cost.

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, tight sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes the optional parameter behavior. Nothing is redundant.

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?

With no annotations and a non-trivial token concept, the description leaves gaps: it does not state whether the call is safe/read-only, how to get a snapshot token, or what 'usage metrics' are aggregated over. The output schema helps, but the token semantics need more coverage.

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?

There is one parameter ('since') and schema coverage is 0% because the schema only says it can be a string or null. The description adds 'snapshot token' semantics, which is useful, but it does not explain what a snapshot token is, how to obtain one, or how it filters results.

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 names a specific resource ('usage metrics') and a distinguishing trait ('content-free'), which separates it from sibling tools that operate on captured content. The optional 'since a snapshot token' clarifies the input. Not maximally specific about what 'usage' means, but enough to identify intent.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like get_buffer_stats or get_runtime_diagnostics, nor any exclusion criteria. The 'content-free' hint implies not for content, but it is not explicit.

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