Статистика сайта

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it declares read-only, no side effects, and low call cost relative to search. It also lists the returned metrics, compensating for the absence of an output schema. It stops short of stating anything about the freshness/update mechanics of the stats themselves.

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?

Front-loads what is returned, then adds usefulness and cost context in efficient sentences. Slight redundancy between the 'general idea of size and activity' and 'quick availability checks' sentences, but nothing wasted.

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?

A zero-parameter tool with no output schema, yet the description enumerates every returned field and adds the read-only/cost profile. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter to document and the description correctly keeps the focus on returned values instead.

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?

States a specific verb (returns statistics) and resource (the database), and enumerates the exact fields returned: total_jokes, total_categories, total_tags, last_update. An agent can immediately tell this apart from the sibling search/list tools without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly positions the tool for a 'general idea of database size and activity' and for 'quick availability checks', and contrasts its low cost with searching. Clear usage context, though it names no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative sibling tool.

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