Get iGrid AI metrics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying exactly what kind of data is returned ('token/cost observability metrics'), which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions exist. For a tool with no parameters, this is sufficient behavioral disclosure.

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 that front-loads the read role and immediately states what is returned. Every word is necessary and informative. No wasted text.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, clear purpose), the description fully satisfies completeness. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and what data it returns. Combined with sibling names, the agent can infer when to use it.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% trivially. Baseline for zero parameters is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details. It correctly omits any irrelevant parameter information.

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 returns 'token/cost observability metrics' for the iGrid AI assistant. The verb 'return' combined with the specific resource 'metrics' makes the purpose unambiguous. It naturally distinguishes from siblings like igrid_export_csv or igrid_run_agent, which have different purposes.

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 phrase 'READ role' hints that this is for read-only observation, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not say when to use this over igrid_list_domains or igrid_get_template. Usage context is implied by the tool name and title but not explicitly stated.

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