Get Stats

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states that the tool retrieves statistics; it does not disclose whether the call is read-only, whether it can be expensive, whether it triggers a refresh, or whether it depends on prior memory initialization. The 'get' verb implies no mutation, but that is implicit rather than explicit.

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 short sentence with no filler or redundancy, and the core action is front-loaded. It is concise, though too minimal to add much beyond the tool name and title.

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?

With zero parameters and an output schema, the structural requirements are low keyboards and return values need not be explained. However, the description does not clarify what the statistics cover or when to choose this tool over the many sibling reporting/debug tools, leaving the contextual picture incomplete.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter meanings for the description to clarify. The baseline 4 for parameterless tools 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?

The description states a clear verb ('获取' / get) and resource ('记忆系统统计信息' / memory system statistics), so an agent can tell it retrieves statistics. It does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling reporting tools like get_weekly_report or get_error_trends, but the core purpose is clear.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus the 17 sibling tools. It does not mention a scenario, prerequisite, or any alternative that might be more appropriate, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely from the name.

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