Execute PromQL Range Query

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it uses PromQL with time parameters, but does not disclose potential failures, pagination, or rate limits. For a tool with rich annotations, the description adds modest extra context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently communicates the core action and key parameters.

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 4-parameter tool with an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description provides adequate context. It names the parameters and states the tool's purpose. Minor gaps include lack of format details and error behavior, but overall it is mostly 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by naming the parameters (start time, end time, step interval). However, it does not specify expected formats (e.g., Unix timestamps or RFC3339) or explain the query parameter beyond 'PromQL range query', leaving ambiguity.

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 executes a PromQL range query with start time, end time, and step interval. However, it does not distinguish this from the sibling tool 'execute_query', which likely handles instant queries, missing an opportunity for differentiation.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., for time-range versus instant queries), nor does it mention prerequisites or conditions.

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