get_metric_summary

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It implies a read-only query but does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or rate limits. The return type is mentioned but not detailed.

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 front-loaded with the purpose, followed by a structured parameter list and return statement. It is appropriately sized for 13 parameters, though the parameter descriptions could be slightly more compact.

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 complexity (13 parameters, no annotations, output schema exists but not described), the description covers parameter semantics and return type. However, it lacks examples, error conditions, and explicit read-only indication, leaving gaps in understanding the full context.

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 schema has 0% parameter description coverage, yet the description provides detailed explanations for all 13 parameters, including examples and valid options (e.g., aggregate: 'max'|'avg'|'sum'|'min'). This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 clearly states that the tool retrieves aggregated TopN of monitoring metrics grouped by label_key. This is specific and differentiates it from sibling tools like get_metric_data, but does not explicitly contrast them.

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 provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_metric_data or search_metric). The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or 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.