lane_stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds semantic context about cooldown (lanes in cooldown are skipped by ask_all), which helps interpret the reported value. It does not disclose return format or pagination, but the read-only nature is already covered by annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists the key metrics, with a parenthetical clarifying cooldown semantics. Every word earns its place and there is no wasted text.

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?

The description covers all the tool's value propositions: the metrics it reports and the meaning of cooldown. With zero parameters and read-only annotations, the context is largely complete. However, since there is no output schema, it does not specify the return data structure (e.g., a map keyed by lane name), which an agent would need to parse the response.

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 schema description coverage is trivially 100%. With no params, the baseline is 4, and the description adds meaningful context about what the tool reports (per-lane health metrics), which is essential given the empty input schema.

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 clearly states the tool provides per-lane health metrics (total runs, failures, consecutive failures/timeouts, and active cooldown), which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like usage_report or reset_lane_state. It lacks an explicit action verb but the resource and scope are unambiguous.

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 the tool is used for inspecting lane health, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer it over alternatives like doctor or usage_report, nor does it provide exclusions. The cooldown note adds context about lane behavior but not direct usage guidance.

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