Velocity Analytics

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the list of computed metrics, which is useful, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as aggregation scope, performance implications, or interpretation details.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the verb and lists the key outputs. Every word earns its place, with no redundant phrases or irrelevant details.

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 read-only analytics tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential inputs and expected outputs. It could mention how to interpret the metrics, but the combination of annotations and schema makes the tool sufficiently understandable.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both 'project' and 'window_days' documented. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it only implies that these parameters affect the analytics, which the schema already states.

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 uses a specific verb 'calculate' and names the resource 'velocity analytics', listing concrete metrics (task completion rate, average cycle time, daily throughput breakdown). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like value_metrics or burndown_chart, which focus on different analytical aspects.

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 implies usage for velocity-related analytics, but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternative tools. It is usable but the context is only implied.

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