Aggregate (stats)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries a lower burden. The description adds that the tool supports grouping and multiple aggregation functions, but does not disclose potential limitations such as maximum output size, behavior on empty tables, or permission requirements. It adequately conveys the read-only nature but lacks depth.

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 sentence with no fluff, achieving high conciseness. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing parameters) without adding much length. It is not overly verbose, but the brevity sacrifices some clarity.

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?

Given 8 parameters (1 required), no output schema, and low documentation coverage, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return format (e.g., JSON object with aggregate values), any limits on results, or typical usage patterns. The tool's complexity demands more context.

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 only 13%, meaning most parameters lack schema descriptions. The description mentions 'count, avg/sum/min/max, optionally grouped', which maps to fields like avgFields, sumFields, groupBy, etc., but does not explain the `query` parameter or `table`. This provides some context beyond the bare schema but is insufficient overall.

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 runs the Aggregate/Stats API on a table and lists specific operations (count, avg/sum/min/max) with optional grouping. It distinguishes itself from siblings like servicenow_get_record and servicenow_query_records, which retrieve individual records or lists rather than summaries.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool over its siblings. It does not mention alternatives, prerequisites, or scenarios where aggregate stats are appropriate versus fetching records. For example, it doesn't state 'Use this when you need summary statistics rather than individual records.'

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