get_statistics

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, authentication requirements, or potential errors. It only states the generic retrieval purpose, leaving the agent without crucial context for safe invocation.

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 with a short paragraph and parameter list. It is front-loaded with the purpose. Could be improved with a more structured format (e.g., bullet points for parameters) to enhance readability.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks information on prerequisites, such as whether OpenSIPS must be running. For a simple retrieval tool, it is minimally adequate but not comprehensive.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining the 'group' parameter with examples (e.g., 'core', 'shmem') and the optional 'name' parameter. However, it could be more precise about the format of 'name' and whether it is case-sensitive.

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 specifies the verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'OpenSIPS runtime statistics', and provides parameter examples. It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from more specific sibling tools like 'get_memory_stats'.

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 usage for general statistics retrieval but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_memory_stats' or 'get_process_list'. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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