im_get_placement_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It implies a read operation but does not explicitly state read-only, nor does it mention authentication, rate limits, or potential side effects. The description is too brief to be informative beyond the basic function.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes key details without unnecessary words. It earns its place by efficiently conveying the tool's functionality.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should provide more detail about the return format. While it lists the metrics (total placements, time-to-fill, department breakdown), it could also include information on data recency, aggregation level, or example response structure to be fully complete.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the parameter semantics are already clear. However, the description adds value by mentioning 'breakdown by department,' which is not reflected in the schema, and by clarifying the output includes specific metrics, aiding the agent in understanding what the tool returns.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: retrieving placement metrics (total placements, time-to-fill, breakdown by department) from the IntelliMatch database for a given period. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('placement metrics'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like im_get_candidate or im_get_application_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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions. For example, it does not specify that this tool is for aggregated metrics and not individual records.

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