verdonz_get_metric

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read operation but says nothing about permissions, what 'metadata' includes, error behavior when the metric is not found, or whether an output is returned.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity is partly under-specification rather than disciplined concision.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and three undocumented parameters, the description should disambiguate identification and return content. It leaves the identifier question (name vs metricId vs datasetId) entirely unanswered.

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?

Three parameters with 0% schema description coverage, yet the description never mentions name, metricId, or datasetId. Crucially, it does not say whether the metric is identified by name, id, or a dataset-scoped pair, leaving the caller unable to choose the right input.

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?

It states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('definition and metadata for a governed metric'), so the operation is unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish itself from sibling 'verdonz_list_metrics' or explain what 'governed' adds.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus verdonz_list_metrics, verdonz_ask, or verdonz_investigate. The agent must infer from the names alone that this is the single-item lookup counterpart to the list tool.

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