alarms_stats

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. 'Get' suggests read-only, but no details on expected behavior (e.g., returns aggregated counts, may be faster than listing all alarms, always returns a single object). The lack of output schema or behavioral notes makes it hard for the agent to predict the call's outcome.

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 with no extraneous words. Perfectly concise for a simple tool.

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?

Despite simplicity, the description lacks crucial context: what constitutes 'aggregate alarm statistics'? Expected return values (e.g., total count, breakdown by status, time range)? Without this, the agent cannot fully anticipate the tool's output.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema coverage is 100% (empty). Per guidelines, 0 params baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific information because there are none.

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 states 'Get aggregate alarm statistics', which clearly identifies the verb (Get) and resource (aggregate alarm statistics). This distinguishes it from siblings like alarms_list (which lists individual alarms) and alarms_rule_get (which gets a specific rule). However, it could be more specific about what 'aggregate' means (e.g., counts, severity distribution).

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description implies usage for retrieving overall statistics, but does not contrast with sibling tools like alarms_list. An agent might infer that this is for summary data vs. detailed list, but the guidance is weak.

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