Erinys Stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only lists output contents. It never states that the call is read-only/side-effect free, whether it is cheap or expensive on a large database, or how 'health' is determined.

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?

It is a single terse fragment with no wasted words and the key noun front-loaded, but the terseness comes at the cost of under-specification rather than efficient information density.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but with zero annotations and zero parameter documentation the definition leaves the agent without guidance on safety, cost, or the meaning of the 'project' argument. For a diagnostic tool with a filtering option, more context is needed.

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% for the single optional 'project' parameter, and the description only hints at it via the phrase 'project breakdown'. It does not say whether passing 'project' filters the stats to one project or changes the shape of the result, leaving the parameter's effect undocumented in both places.

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 fragment 'Database statistics: observation count, project breakdown, health' names the resource (database stats) and enumerates what is reported, so an agent can tell it apart from memory-mutation siblings like erinys_save or erinys_search. It is clear but not framed as a sentence with a verb, and no sibling is explicitly named as the alternative.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. An agent must infer that this is a diagnostic/introspection tool used before or after other operations.

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