sonar_get_pr_metrics

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the tool retrieves metrics (read-only), but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or error behavior. Adequate but could add more context about the system (e.g., SonarQube/Cloud).

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose and metrics, followed by usage examples. No wasted 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 a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description explains the output (metrics list) and usage context. Lacks details on return format or pagination, but sufficient for typical use.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear param description. The tool description adds context about what metrics are returned but does not enhance parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get quality metrics for a pull request' and lists specific metrics (coverage, duplication, issues). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying the scope (overall PR metrics vs. duplication or file-level issues).

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?

Provides explicit example queries when the tool should be used ('what is my coverage?', 'does Sonar pass?', etc.). Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the examples cover common intents.

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