loki_labels

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

The description states it is read-only and returns only label names, which clarifies its non-destructive nature and output scope. However, with no annotations, more detail on output format or limitations could be added.

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?

Two concise sentences, each adding value. The first sentence states the action, the second provides usage guidance and behavioral notes. No wasted words.

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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, and behavior completely. Nothing else is needed.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description adds no parameter details. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool, and the schema coverage is 100% (trivially).

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 it lists Loki label names, which is the core purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like loki_label_values (which lists values for a label) and loki_query (queries logs).

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 advises using this before querying to discover dimensions like host, service, or level. It provides a clear use case but does not mention when not to use or alternative tools.

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