get_report_queries_user_locked_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the HTTP method and parameter locations, but lacks details on response structure, error conditions, or any side effects (though it's a GET, so likely read-only). The description does not add beyond what the name implies.

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 sentences, concise and no fluff. The endpoint is named first, which helps. It is structured clearly, though it could be more informative without being long.

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 low schema coverage and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain how route IDs are structured, what filters are available, or what the response contains. The output schema exists, but the description doesn't leverage it. An agent would need to inspect the schema to understand the call fully.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It mentions that route IDs go in path_params, filters and pagination in query, and request headers in headers, but does not specify the structure or format of these parameters. It is vague and lacks concrete examples.

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 retrieves user locked stats and specifies the endpoint. It differentiates from siblings like get_report_queries_user_enabled_stats by the resource name, though it could explicitly contrast with similar user stats tools.

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. There is no mention of exclusions or conditions. An agent has no context for selecting this over similar report queries.

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