Download Volume By Indexer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only states the aggregation action but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, any side effects, pagination behavior, or output format. This is insufficient for an 11-parameter tool.

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 extremely concise (6 words), but conciseness comes at the expense of completeness. For a tool with many parameters and siblings, the brevity is under-specification, not efficiency.

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 11 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and many similar sibling tools, the description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain the output, filtering options, or what 'volume' refers to, leaving the agent without sufficient 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 0%, and the description adds no parameter information. With 11 parameters including enums ('app', 'detail') and filters ('from', 'to', 'page', etc.), the absence of any parameter clarification severely impedes correct invocation.

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 specific verb ('Sum') and resource ('history download volume by indexer'), clearly indicating aggregation by indexer. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like 'grabs_by_indexer' or 'failed_downloads_by_indexer', which are similarly named and might confuse selection.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many siblings (e.g., 'grabs_by_indexer', 'success_rate_by_indexer'), the description fails to provide context for selection criteria or exclusions.

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