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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the content (statistics and a citation sentence) but does not mention data freshness, update frequency, or any limitations. This is adequate but not rich.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main purpose ('Board-wide daily statistics') and then adds specifics. Every part earns its place, with no waste.

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 tool has no output schema, the description provides a solid overview of the return values (types of statistics and the citation sentence). It does not detail exact formatting, but for a 0-parameter tool, it is reasonably complete.

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, so the description is not required to explain parameter behavior. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description adds useful context about what the returned statistics cover.

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 provides board-wide daily statistics, listing specific metrics (open jobs, employers, new/closed this week, medians) and dimensions (category, region). This is distinct from sibling tools like get_employer or search_jobs, which focus on individual entities or searches.

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 context implies when to use this tool (when a summary of board-wide statistics is needed), and siblings focus on specific data lookups. However, it does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, so it lacks an explicit 'when-not-to-use' statement.

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