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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that grouping commas and currency are handled and that non-numeric rows are excluded and counted, which are useful behavioral details. However, it does not mention return format or error conditions, leaving some gaps.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and adds handling details in a parenthetical. No wasted words, and the most important information appears first.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It lists the statistics and clarifies data handling, but does not specify the exact output structure or error handling for invalid columns, which are minor gaps. Overall, it provides enough context for a 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 schema provides only a string parameter with no description (0% coverage). The description adds meaning by indicating the column should be numeric, which is beyond the schema. However, it does not explicitly state that the parameter is the column name or provide examples, so it partially compensates but is not comprehensive.

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 explicitly states the tool computes count, min, max, mean, median, and sum for a numeric column of the Tickmarko dataset, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle columns, rows, search, and comparison. The verb 'compute' is implied but the list of statistics is specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like dataset_search or dataset_top. It provides some context about handling commas and currency, which may guide usage, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate selection.

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