get_runtime_metrics

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

The description discloses that metrics are privacy-preserving and aggregate, which is a key behavioral trait. However, without annotations, it lacks details on side effects (presumably none), data access patterns, or cost. The privacy disclosure adds value but is alone insufficient for full transparency.

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?

Single sentence with 8 words, front-loaded with verb and object. No superfluous content. Perfectly concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and key attribute (privacy). It is mostly complete, though it could mention that it is a safe read-only call. Given the low complexity, missing details are minor.

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?

Tool has no parameters (0). Per guidelines, baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description adds no parameter information because none are needed, and the schema has 100% coverage trivially.

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 'Return privacy-preserving aggregate runtime metrics' clearly states the verb (return) and resource (runtime metrics), and the phrase 'privacy-preserving aggregate' distinguishes it from sibling diagnostic tools like get_top_queries or get_server_info.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, suitable contexts, or when to avoid using it. Sibling tools like get_server_info are not explicitly differentiated.

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