analytics_get_metric_data

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'historical metrics' and 'ISO 8601 timestamps', but does not confirm whether this is a read-only operation, describe the response shape, or address pagination, timezone handling, or required permissions.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded, containing no fluff. However, it is under-specified for a tool with five parameters and multiple optional fields, so it does not fully earn its place as the sole guidance.

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 tool has five parameters, no annotations, and no usage context, this description is largely inadequate. The output schema may explain return values, but the description still fails to cover parameter semantics, filtering options, or how this differs from other analytics tools.

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 only hints at the timestamp format (ISO 8601) but fails to explain 'metrics', 'queue_ids', 'instance_id', or their relationships. The description provides almost no added meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 a specific action ('Get') and resource ('historical metrics'), and the phrase 'historical' distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'get_current_metrics'. While it could be more explicit about exclusion, the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 such as 'get_current_metrics' or other analytics tools. There is no mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or filters, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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