get_statistics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly confirm safety, mention authentication or limitations, or explain the scope of 'statistics' beyond the period parameter. The return content is partially specified ('etc.'), leaving some ambiguity.

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 concise and well-structured with Args and Returns sections. It is front-loaded with the purpose and every sentence contributes meaning, avoiding redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter stats tool, the description covers the purpose, parameter semantics, and return content adequately. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return fields. Slight gap: it does not mention when to prefer this over get_tag_statistics, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 schema only provides type and default for 'period'. The description adds the valid values (all, 7d, 30d) and clarifies its meaning as a time period, compensating for the 0% schema description coverage. This is valuable semantic information beyond the 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 identifies the tool as 'Get task statistics' and provides return details (counts by status, completion rates), distinguishing it from sibling get_tag_statistics which focuses on tag-specific statistics. The verb+resource is specific, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_tasks or get_tag_statistics. The description lacks context on use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer appropriate selection.

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