Policy Run Count

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and idempotent behavior. The description adds the optional days filter but does not disclose potential limitations like date range constraints or aggregation behavior. Returns a simple count, but lacks detail on handling edge cases.

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 no redundancy. Each sentence adds distinct value: main purpose and optional parameter.

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 low-complexity tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers the basics but lacks information about return values, error cases, or when results might be empty. It is minimally adequate.

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 description clarifies the `days` parameter as a look-back filter, which adds value since schema coverage is 0%. However, the `output_format` parameter remains unexplained, leaving ambiguity about allowed values like 'csv' or 'json'.

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 clearly states it gets aggregate policy execution counts with optional days filter. It distinguishes from sibling tools like policy_execution_counts and policy_runs_by_policy by focusing on aggregate counts, but does not explicitly differentiate.

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 versus alternatives like policy_execution_counts or policy_runs_by_policy. The description does not provide context for preferred use cases.

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