list-rum-metrics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe read operation returning a complete set. The description adds 'with their definitions', clarifying the return content beyond just names. However, it does not disclose pagination, limits, or whether metrics are returned in a particular order. The description adds some value but is not rich.

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 concise sentence of 8 words that efficiently conveys the purpose. No redundant or extraneous information is present.

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 tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately states that it returns definitions for all configured RUM metrics. It is complete enough for a simple list operation, though it could explicitly mention the output format or that no pagination is needed. Given the simplicity, it is well-suited.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. The description does not need to add parameter details. Per guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline score of 4. The description adds no extra parameter info, but none is needed.

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 'List all configured rum-based metrics with their definitions' clearly specifies the action (list) and resource (rum-based metrics). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'get-rum-metric' (single metric) and 'create-rum-metric' (mutation), as it indicates a listing of all items with definitions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It does not mention that 'get-rum-metric' should be used for a specific metric, nor does it indicate any prerequisites or filtering options. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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