Compression stats

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

Without annotations, description fully explains behavior: returns two categories of stats (session and lifetime), lists fields, and notes persistence under MESHMIND_HOME. No side effects or permissions needed are implied, which is sufficient for a read-only stats tool.

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?

Single sentence is efficient but slightly dense. Front-loaded with the main action, but could be broken into two sentences for clarity.

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, no-output-schema tool, description adequately explains return values (session vs. lifetime fields). Covers all listed fields, making it usable for an agent to interpret results.

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?

No parameters exist; description does not need to add param info. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate as schema coverage is 100% and description adds value by explaining return structure.

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 it returns token-savings stats with specific fields (session and lifetime scopes). It distinguishes from sibling tools like crush_file and get_optimized_context by focusing on statistics rather than compression or retrieval.

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 use this tool over alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, complementary tools, or when not to use it.

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