get_launchpad_stats

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. 'Aggregate' and 'stats' convey a read-only operation, and it adds a useful behavioral detail: results are computed over a rolling window with optional windowHours. It does not document the default window length or response shape, but it does not imply any hidden side effect.

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 concise sentences with the behavior front-loaded, the use case captured in one quoted phrase, and the optional parameter mentioned without repeating schema constraints. There is no filler or redundant detail.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and one optional parameter, this description covers the core purpose, the intended query, and the general counts returned. The main missing piece is the exact default window and whether results are grouped per launchpad, but the 'which launchpads are hot' cue makes the return semantics reasonably clear.

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 only provides an integer type and a minimum with no textual description, so the description's mention of 'Optional windowHours' and 'rolling window' adds the needed conceptual meaning. It does not say what the default window is when omitted, but for a single, clearly named optional parameter this is solid compensation for zero schema coverage.

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?

States a specific action ('Aggregate launchpad stats'), the resource ('launchpad'), and the key output dimensions ('creations/graduations counts') over a time window. It also clearly differentiates this from sibling per-token metadata/price tools and from list_creations/list_graduations.

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?

Provides a clear usage condition: use for 'which launchpads are hot'. It does not explicitly list alternatives or say when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5, but the quoted use case gives an agent enough context for selection.

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