context-prometheus

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description implies this is a read-only operation ('consultes'), but it doesn't specify what the tool returns (e.g., documentation, examples, or metadata), any rate limits, authentication needs, or potential side effects. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could be slightly more specific to improve clarity. There is no wasted verbiage, making it appropriately concise.

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?

Given the complexity of interacting with Prometheus and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., textual guidelines, structured data, or examples), how it integrates with sibling tools, or any behavioral traits. For a tool in a set with multiple query-related siblings, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 has 0 parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, and it appropriately doesn't mention any. This meets the baseline for a parameterless tool, though it could theoretically hint at implicit inputs if relevant.

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 states the tool's purpose as consulting rules and guidelines for making queries and interacting with Prometheus, which is clear but somewhat vague. It doesn't specify what specific resources or actions are involved, nor does it distinguish this tool from its siblings like 'instant-query' or 'range-query' that might also involve query-related operations.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the name alone. This lack of explicit guidelines makes it unclear how this tool differs from sibling query-related tools.

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