Lists governed metrics, including name, label, unit, description, and allowed group-by fields, to help agents identify queryable measures in the results store.
List governed metrics (name, label, unit, description, allowed group_by).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, but for a zero-parameter tool the risk surface is small. 'Governed' hints that only a curated metric set is returned, which is useful context beyond structured fields, yet nothing is said about ordering, completeness, or whether the set is workspace-scoped.
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?
One short, front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource first and no filler. The parenthetical return-field list slightly duplicates the output schema, which is the only wasted surface.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and with no parameters there is little else to cover. The remaining gap is scope — whether the list covers all governed metrics or a filtered subset — which an agent might want before deciding to page or follow up.
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 — baseline 4 applies. The field list in parentheses describes the response shape rather than any input, so it contributes little on this dimension.
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 ('List') and a specific resource ('governed metrics'), and the parenthetical enumerates what each metric carries. That clearly separates it from the singular sibling get_metric, though it never names that sibling explicitly.
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?
Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the discovery step before get_metric, but the description never states when to use it, when not to, or which sibling to prefer. No prerequisite or scoping conditions are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.