query-isp-metrics

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'May be unavailable depending on account', which hints at access restrictions, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like whether it returns aggregated data, required permissions, or data freshness. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 very short (one sentence plus a note), which is efficient. No redundant information. Front-loaded with action. However, could include more context without being wordy.

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 no output schema and multiple sibling tools, the description is incomplete for an agent to fully understand when and how to use it. It lacks differentiation from 'get-isp-metrics' and does not describe return format or pagination. Annotations are missing, so more burden falls on description.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance beyond what schema already provides. The account availability note is global, not param-specific.

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 it queries ISP metrics with filters, but does not differentiate from sibling tool 'get-isp-metrics' which likely has a similar purpose. The verb 'Query' is appropriate, but the resource 'ISP metrics' is a bit broad.

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 mentions availability may vary by account, giving a usage context, but lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get-isp-metrics' or 'compare-sites'. No explicit when-not-to-use criteria.

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