get_metric_metadata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only mentions availability constraints on certain tenants but does not disclose behavioral traits such as being a read-only operation, required permissions, response size, or side effects. The minimal extra information leaves the agent guessing about important aspects.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that each serve a purpose: stating the main action and providing an important usage note. It is not overly wordy, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) for clarity.

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 simple input schema (one parameter) and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and an availability caveat. However, it lacks details about the returned metadata structure (e.g., what fields are included), which would be helpful for an agent to understand the tool's 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (the metricKey parameter has a description with an example). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 the descriptor/metadata for a single metric by key', specifying the resource and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like list_metrics (lists all metrics) and query_metric (retrieves time series) by mentioning the metadata focus and providing alternatives, though not explicitly differentiating from all siblings.

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 explicitly states that on Gen3/Grail tenants the endpoint may be unavailable and suggests using query_metric or execute_dql instead. This provides clear context and alternatives, though it does not cover all possible usage scenarios or exclusions.

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