Task store statistics

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, and the description reinforces these traits while adding auth context ('Auth: tool policy gate'). This is useful behavioral information beyond the structured annotations, even though it does not describe response shape.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core return value appears first, followed by usage guidance, exclusions, and annotations-related traits. Every sentence contributes distinct information with no filler.

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 parameterless, read-only statistics tool with an output schema and clear annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, alternatives, safety, idempotency, auth, and absence of parameters. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 and the schema is empty, so the baseline is 4. The description explicitly confirms 'no parameters,' which adds no new meaning but is consistent and reassuring for the agent.

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?

Description clearly states the resource (task store), the action (return total task count and counts by status), and distinguishes itself from tasks_get and tasks_list. The purpose is concrete and an agent can tell it apart from sibling tools without inspecting schemas.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use for dashboards' and warns against using it to read a specific handle (tasks_get) or list handles (tasks_list). This gives both positive and negative usage guidance with named alternatives.

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