索引统计

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. '统计' strongly implies a read-only, side-effect-free operation, but the description never states it is read-only or that it changes nothing. The param's connection-level memory behavior (传一次后本连接记住) lives only in the schema, not the description.

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 tight clauses: what is returned, then when to call it. The metric list is front-loaded and no sentence is 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 zero-required-param read tool with no output schema, the enumeration of returned metrics partly substitutes for missing return documentation. The only shortfall is the absent explicit read-only statement, minor given the tool's nature.

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% and the single project parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the unresolved_project trigger condition. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource (本项目记忆库统计) and enumerates exactly what is measured: 会话数/状态/来源/体积/当前 scope. That distinguishes it clearly from session-level siblings like list_sessions or get_session_detail, though the verb is implied by the noun phrase 统计 rather than stated as an action.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger: 开始处理项目任务前可调用，了解记忆库规模与覆盖范围. This tells the agent when the tool is worth calling. It names no alternative or exclusion, but no sibling overlaps enough to require one.

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