get-metric-history

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so agent knows it's safe. Description adds 'full history' but doesn't mention pagination (pageToken, maxResults) or behavior like ordering. No contradiction with annotations.

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 is concise and front-loaded. However, it is somewhat underspecified; could add more context without becoming verbose. Still effective.

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?

Despite low complexity, the description lacks completeness. It doesn't mention pagination, ordering, or what 'full history' means. With no output schema, description should explain return format. Missing details for a tool with pagination parameters.

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 low (25%, only metricKey has a description). Description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it doesn't explain runId, pageToken, or maxResults. The description should compensate by describing these parameters.

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?

Description clearly states 'get full history of a metric for a run', using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like log-metric (which writes) and search-runs (which lists runs).

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?

Implied usage: when you need the history of a metric for a run. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives (e.g., log-metric for recording, search-runs for listing runs). Lacks guidance on deciding between this and similar tools.

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