get_resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value by naming the metric identifiers net_rx_rate/net_tx_rate and specifying their unit (bytes per second), but it leaves the units for CPU and memory unspecified and does not say whether this is the local host or the whole fleet.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose and spends the remainder on the metric detail an agent needs. No filler or redundancy.

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 input schema and no output schema, the description carries the full burden of describing the return payload, and it only partially does so: it lists the metrics but omits units for CPU and memory and does not indicate aggregation scope (per-host vs. cluster). Adequate to call the tool, but thin for interpreting its output.

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 the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter surface for the description to compensate for.

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 verb+resource ('Get current host resource metrics summary') and enumerates the exact metrics returned, which implicitly separates it from siblings like get_top_consumers and get_health. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling it could be confused with, so it does not reach the top band.

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 word 'current' implies a point-in-time snapshot rather than historical trend data, which is a useful implied usage cue. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_top_consumers, get_health, or get_swarm_info, and no exclusions are given.

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