get_otlp_metric_labels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the '[PREVIEW]' status and the optional metric-narrowing behavior, but no further behavioral context such as response shape or pagination behavior.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, includes the preview caveat, and expresses the optional narrowing behavior efficiently.

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 simple read-only list operation with fully documented optional parameters and no output schema, the description plus schema is largely sufficient. It could mention the exact return shape, but the tool name and 'List label names' make the output reasonably inferable.

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 all 5 parameters documented. The description does not add parameter-level detail, but it does not need to because the schema already carries that burden; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List') and a clear resource ('label names on native OTLP metrics'), with an optional narrowing condition. It is clear enough to differentiate from get_otlp_metric_names and get_otlp_label_values, but it does not explicitly mention those sibling distinctions.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus related tools such as get_otlp_label_values or query_otlp_metrics. The only usage hint is the optional metric-narrowing phrase, which is more of a parameter detail than a selection guideline.

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