metrics_renewal

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds behavioral details: silent ignore of filters, empty result for reversed ranges, and response structure specifics (no uniqueTotal, addons.datasets). No contradictions.

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?

Well-structured with main purpose first, then details, a note, and a link to spec. Every sentence adds value, though slightly verbose for an experienced user.

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?

No output schema, but description compensates by explaining the response structure (total.datasets, addons, no uniqueTotal) and behavior on invalid inputs. Covers complexity well.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds value by noting that other filters are ignored and that aggregation affects the number of elements, plus the effect of start/end dates on empty results.

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 it provides 'Cloud renewal TIME-SERIES' with specific structure (total.datasets split by billing period, two series each), and explicitly contrasts with churn, distinguishing it from sibling tools like metrics_churn.

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?

Explicitly states only aggregation/startDate/endDate work, other filters are silently ignored, and that reversed/future ranges return empty. Could further clarify when not to use, but sibling context and description imply it's for renewal metrics.

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