graph_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Return index state' suggests a read-only operation and lists the kind of data returned, but it does not explicitly state whether it is non-mutating, whether it requires special permissions, or whether there are any side effects or consistency caveats.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every element ('node/edge counts', 'files indexed', 'last update time') adds concrete value.

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-parameter, read-only stats tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it names the return categories. A small gap is that it does not describe the exact output format or timing semantics of 'last update time', but this is minor for a stats endpoint.

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, so there are no parameter details to document. The description appropriately focuses on what the returned state contains, which is all an agent needs for invocation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and a clear resource ('index state'), and enumerates the exact contents (node/edge counts, files indexed, last update time). This distinguishes graph_stats from its siblings, which are about recording sessions, querying context, and analyzing impacts/side effects.

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 usage: call this tool when you need index state or statistics. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention any exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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