aletheia_get_telemetry

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It does disclose the main response contents and 'Retrieve' implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state whether there are side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or how failures surface. The mention of latency percentiles under 1ms is also slightly ambiguous.

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 one front-loaded sentence that uses a colon-delimited list to pack in the exact payload of metrics. There is no filler, and the structure makes the return contents easy to scan.

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?

The description covers the headline telemetry metrics well but omits any mention of audit records, even though the auditLogLimit parameter indicates the response includes recent audit records. Since there is no output schema, the description should have explained this component to be fully complete.

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 100%, and the single optional parameter auditLogLimit is already fully documented in the schema with its default value and purpose. The description adds nothing about this parameter, but it does not need to; a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and object ('Retrieve runtime safety telemetry') and then enumerates the exact metrics returned, so there is no ambiguity about what the tool does. Its focus on telemetry also clearly separates it from sibling tools like aletheia_get_mandate or aletheia_intercept.

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 'runtime safety telemetry' implies a monitoring/observability use case, and the sibling names make alternatives visible, but the description never explicitly states when to choose this tool over aletheia_get_mandate or aletheia_intercept, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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