analysis_intervals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the output content (frame counts and byte stats per interval) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like interval edge effects or display filter semantics. This matches the bar for annotation-covered tools.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loads the core action, and contains no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to understanding.

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 read-only statistics tool with clear annotations and an output schema, the description plus schema provides enough context to use the tool. It does not mention session prerequisites or the meaning of display_filter, but these are minor omissions given the self-explanatory parameter names and existing structured data.

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%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It only hints at interval_ms via 'per time interval' and does not explain display_filter or analysis_session_id. Parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the lack of any description for these fields is a clear gap.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies an exact resource ('frame count and byte statistics per time interval'), making it clear what the tool does. It also implicitly distinguishes this tool from siblings like analysis_get_statistics by specifying the per-interval breakdown.

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?

It states a clear use case ('useful for traffic pattern analysis'), giving context for when the tool would be appropriate. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but for a simple statistics tool this is sufficient guidance.

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