liara_get_metrics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Get app metrics summary' implies a read-only operation, but doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, data freshness, or what format the summary returns. For a metrics tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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 at just three words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the essential action and resource. For a simple retrieval tool, this brevity is appropriate and efficient.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and the description's minimalism, this is inadequate for a metrics tool. The description doesn't explain what 'metrics summary' includes, how metrics are aggregated, time granularity options, or return format. For a tool that presumably provides quantitative data about app performance, more context is needed.

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 parameters ('appName' and optional 'period') well-documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter information beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding of parameter usage or constraints.

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 'Get app metrics summary' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('app metrics summary'), making the purpose understandable. However, it's somewhat vague about what specific metrics are included and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'liara_get_app' or 'liara_get_logs' that also retrieve app-related information.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools available (like liara_get_app, liara_get_logs, liara_list_apps), there's no indication of when metrics summary is appropriate versus other app information sources. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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