get_analytics_group_metadata

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds context about pagination, the specific returned structure (total_groups, group_count, metadata_groups), and the enterprise restriction (403 error). This complements the annotations well.

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: two sentences that cover the action, output structure, usage context, and a key constraint (enterprise gating). Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 complexity (32 parameters, pagination, nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient high-level context. It explains the tool's purpose, grouping mechanism, and enterprise limitation. It could elaborate on pagination details or filtering but is adequate for the structured fields provided.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the input schema already describes all parameters. The description reinforces the need for metadata_key and time window but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. Thus baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a paginated metadata breakdown with specific fields (total_groups, group_count, metadata_groups array) grouped by the required metadata_key. It distinguishes itself from sibling analytics tools like get_analytics_group_models and get_analytics_group_users by focusing on metadata-based grouping.

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 explicitly advises usage for custom breakdowns (e.g., per-environment, per-feature) and mentions the need to pass metadata_key and time window. It also notes enterprise gating with a 403 response for non-Enterprise plans. However, it does not compare to alternative tools or provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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