wave_get_stream_metrics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly discloses the HTTP method GET (a read-only operation), the specific endpoint, and the return content domains (views, watch time, geographic/device breakdown over a date range). It does not mention default date-range behavior or pagination, but this is a relatively lightweight analytics read.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the action and scope before enumerating the returned metrics and the optional date range. Every element contributes useful information.

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?

For a 3-parameter tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it explains the resource, the metrics returned, and the optional date filter. Minor gaps such as the default time window when from/to are omitted are not addressed, but nothing essential to selecting the tool is missing.

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%, so each parameter is already documented (stream_id UUID, optional from/to ISO 8601 timestamps). The description adds only the phrase 'optional date range', which restates the schema's notion of the from/to parameters rather than adding new semantic detail.

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 states a clear action ('Get analytics') and a specific resource ('a single stream'), reinforced by the endpoint GET /v1/streams/{id}/analytics and the listed metrics. It is distinguishable from broader tools like wave_list_streams, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling analytics tools such as wave_get_viewers or wave_get_usage.

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 scope 'for a single stream' and 'optional date range' imply when this tool is appropriate, and the metrics listed (views, watch time, breakdown) indicate the data domain. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer an alternative tool or when this tool is not appropriate, so usage direction remains implied rather than stated.

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