metrics_churn

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds behavioral traits: silent ignoring of certain filters, time-series structure, and breakdown details. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with key information and includes a spec URL. A bit verbose but earns its length with useful details. No redundant sentences.

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 the tool's complexity (time-series, multiple series, per-app breakdown, filter constraints) and absence of output schema, the description fully explains what is returned, how to compute rate, and which parameters work. Agent has enough to invoke correctly.

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 clear descriptions for all 3 parameters. Description adds value by explaining that only these 3 filters are effective and others are ignored, enhancing the parameter context.

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?

Clearly states 'Cloud churn TIME-SERIES (not a single rate)' and specifics what it returns: total.datasets split by billing period with two series per period, plus per-app breakdown. Distinguishes from a simple rate computation.

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?

Mentions that only 3 filters work (aggregation/startDate/endDate) and others are silently ignored, and that caller must compute rate. However, does not compare to sibling tool metrics_churn_benchmark or provide when-to-use guidance.

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