search_metric

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

With no annotations, the description provides behavioral details such as camelCase splitting, fuzzy matching, default values, and sorting preferences. It describes return values, making the tool fairly transparent for a search operation.

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 moderately long but well-organized with an Args section and bullet points. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more concise without losing 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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: parameter details, return value summary, and usage. It is complete for a search tool with 5 parameters and required fields.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explains each parameter thoroughly: keywords (with examples), namespace (fuzzy match), limit (default), match_mode (enum logic), prefer_namespaces (default list). This adds significant value beyond the bare 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 clearly states '搜索可用的 ZStack 监控指标', which identifies the tool's purpose as searching monitoring metrics. It provides details on parameters but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like search_api.

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 explains how to use each parameter with examples and defaults, but lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_metric_data or search_api. Usage is implied but not explicitly stated.

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