system_get_stats_digest

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a genuinely useful behavioral trait: per-user traffic history is stored at daily UTC granularity, so the 'traffic by new users' metric snaps to whole days at range edges. However, it omits auth/permission requirements, rate limits, and any statement on return characteristics for what is a GET endpoint.

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 useful body is a single dense sentence that earns its place, but the definition opens with a redundant HTTP path plus a restated title, and ends with a confusing fragment about pagination. Front-loading the redundant restatement dilutes the useful content.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must stand alone; it does describe the metric categories and the granularity caveat, which is more than many siblings offer. Still it does not describe the shape of the response or permissions, leaving gaps for a 2-parameter reporting endpoint.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both start (inclusive) and end (exclusive) fully documented including ISO 8601 format. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema; the trailing 'Пагинация через query-параметры: start' mentions pagination via query parameters but is garbled and potentially misleading given only two range params exist. Baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific resource (aggregated system statistics over a datetime range) and enumerates the concrete metrics returned: created/expired users, total traffic, traffic by new users, and new HWID devices. This differentiates it reasonably from siblings like system_get_stats or system_get_recap. The redundant 'GET /api/system/stats/digest' line and 'Get Stats Digest' restatement add noise but don't obscure the purpose.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as system_get_stats, system_get_recap, or system_get_bandwidth_stats, all of which sit in the same family. The datetime range is implied as the use case but no exclusions or comparison conditions are stated. The trailing pagination sentence is confusing rather than directive.

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