get_text_statistics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It lists outputs but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, any rate limits, or if it requires network calls. However, it does not contradict expected behavior.

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 a single sentence listing outputs, which is concise and front-loaded. It could be slightly improved by grouping outputs, but it is not verbose.

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 the simple single-parameter input and no output schema, the description provides a reasonable overview of what the tool returns. However, it lacks details on the format or structure of the output, which would be helpful.

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 input schema has one parameter 'text' with 0% description coverage. The description does not elaborate on the parameter, such as expected format, length limits, or encoding. Since schema coverage is low, the description should compensate but does not.

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 the tool provides comprehensive text statistics including words, sentences, paragraphs, reading time, readability scores, and language. It distinguishes itself from sibling single-stat tools like count_words and count_sentences.

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?

The description implies the tool is for obtaining multiple statistics at once, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus individual statistic tools (e.g., count_words) or when not to use it. No alternatives are mentioned.

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