get_metadata

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly implies a read-only operation and explains the optional field-scoping behavior, but it does not describe what metadata is returned, how errors are handled, or how output is structured.

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 tightly written sentence with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the optional field behavior is integrated clearly without burrying the core purpose.

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 is too sparse for a tool with no output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage. It omits the meaning of required parameters `group` and `host`, does not describe the return value, and gives no indication of how this relates to sibling tools like list_fields or fetch_series.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that `field` selects a single field within the plugin and implies `plugin` is the metadata target, but it says nothing about the required `group` and `host` parameters, leaving an agent without enough context to populate them correctly.

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 verb and resource: get metadata for a plugin, with a conditional for a single field. It is specific enough to distinguish the main action from siblings like render_graph and fetch_series, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from list_plugins or list_fields.

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?

No guidance is given about when to prefer this tool over alternatives. The conditional 'if `field` is given' describes behavior, not selection criteria, and there is no mention of situations where list_fields or list_plugins would be more appropriate.

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