get-index-metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Get detailed metrics' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output format looks like. The description is minimal and lacks essential context for safe and effective use.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, though it could benefit from more detail given the lack of annotations and schema coverage.

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 (a tool with one parameter but no annotations or output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'detailed metrics' include, how to interpret results, or usage context. For a tool with zero schema coverage and no annotations, more descriptive content is needed to guide the agent effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'for an index' which hints at the 'indexUid' parameter, but provides no details on parameter meaning, format, or constraints. The description adds minimal value beyond the bare schema, failing to clarify what an 'indexUid' is or how to obtain it.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('detailed metrics for an index'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get-stats' or 'get-health-status' by specifying 'metrics' for an index, though it could be more specific about what metrics are included.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get-stats' or 'get-health-status'. The description implies it's for index-specific metrics, but it doesn't specify prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative contexts with sibling tools.

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