metrika_list_counters

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses that the operation is read-only and uses a server-side credential, covering both safety and auth model. This is meaningful for a zero-parameter listing tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action, resource, and credential model efficiently.

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 the zero-parameter schema, presence of an output schema, and simple read-only nature, the description covers the essential context. It could add a brief note tying it to sibling Metrika tools, but this is not critical for correct invocation.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty. A baseline of 4 applies because there are no parameters requiring semantic explanation beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Metrika counters'), making the operation unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling Metrika tools such as metrika_list_goals and metrika_get_statistics by identifying counters as the target.

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 does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or compare against related tools. The phrase 'server-side read-only credential' hints at an auth context but does not explain when an agent should choose this tool over sibling Metrika tools.

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