uipath_get_job_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the output composition but does not explain the scope when folderId is omitted, time range, aggregation behavior, or any implied read-only nature. The term 'overall' hints at aggregation but lacks concrete detail.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the action and the key output components. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple stats tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides a minimal but acceptable overview. However, it lacks context around default behavior (e.g., what happens when folderId is not provided) and does not fully clarify the return structure beyond counts and success rate.

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% because the only parameter (folderId) already has a descriptive comment. The tool description adds no additional meaning about parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies. It neither clarifies the parameter's default behavior nor its optionality impact.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('overall job statistics') with explicit scope ('counts by state and success rate'). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like uipath_get_jobs (which lists individual jobs) and uipath_get_job_details (which targets one job).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as uipath_get_dashboard_summary or uipath_get_count_stats. The description only states what it does, not when it should be preferred, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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