get_metrics

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly notes an authorization requirement, which is a useful trait. However, it does not describe the response format, error behavior, or whether the operation is read-only (implied but not stated).

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 very concise: two lines of functional text plus one line for the parameter. Every sentence adds value, and the key action is front-loaded. No unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present), the description adequately covers the core purpose and authorization. However, it does not contextualize what a 'metric entry' is relative to sibling tools like get_records or get_user_metadata, which could cause confusion.

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 schema coverage is 0%, but the description's Args section explains that the 'id' parameter is a metric entry ID. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare integer type and title. For a single parameter, this is sufficient compensation.

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 tool retrieves a specific metric entry by ID, which is a specific verb and resource. It helps distinguish from sibling tools that retrieve other resources (like notes, workouts, records), but does not elaborate on what a metric entry is.

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 mentions 'Requires special API authorization,' which provides context for when to use (only with appropriate permissions). However, it does not specify when to avoid this tool or compare it to alternatives like get_records or get_workouts.

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