get_torrent_blocker_reports_stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the '[READ]' tag is consistent with that. The description adds the endpoint path but says nothing about what the stats cover, refresh cadence, or aggregation scope, so it contributes only modest context beyond the annotations.

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?

Two short lines, front-loaded with the verb+resource and then the read marker and path. No filler or redundancy, though the content is minimal rather than tightly crafted.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with annotations covering the safety profile, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks any statement of what the returned stats represent or how they relate to the get_torrent_blocker_reports sibling, and no output schema exists to fill that gap.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; baseline 4 applies. Schema coverage is 100% (empty schema) and no behavioral parameter caveats are needed.

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 largely restates the tool name ('Get Torrent Blocker Reports Stats') but the added '[READ] GET /api/node-plugins/torrent-blocker/stats' line pins down the actual resource being queried. It does not distinguish this stats endpoint from the sibling get_torrent_blocker_reports, so an agent cannot tell from the text alone which of the two to call.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the sibling get_torrent_blocker_reports, and no indication of what conditions make the stats variant appropriate. The only context is the HTTP path.

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