get_job_queue_metrics

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

The description discloses the behavioral constraint that only superusers can use this tool, which is crucial. With no annotations, the description carries full burden, but it does not mention side effects, whether the operation is read-only (though implied by 'get'), or what response to expect (no output schema provided). This leaves some transparency gaps.

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 extremely concise, using a single sentence. It front-loads the action and resource, and adds the superuser constraint efficiently. However, it could be slightly more detailed without being verbose, so a 4 rather than 5.

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 that there is no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., the structure of metrics). It fails to do so, leaving a gap in completeness. The superuser note is helpful but insufficient to fully inform an agent about 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?

There are no parameters, so the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds meaning beyond the empty schema by naming the resource and the access restriction. According to the guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4, and the description adds relevant context, so this score is appropriate.

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') and the resource ('job queue metrics'), fulfilling the specific verb+resource requirement. It also specifies a scope constraint ('superuser-only'), which helps distinguish it from other 'get_' tools among the many 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 includes the important context that this tool is 'superuser-only', implying restricted access. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state when not to use it or mention any prerequisites beyond superuser status.

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