Get Application Statistics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It indicates the tool returns aggregated data grouped by status, which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose aspects like whether the summary is real-time, cached, or requires any permissions.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, though it could be slightly more structured by hinting at the output format.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete for the tool's simplicity. However, it lacks details about the summary's granularity (e.g., all statuses or only certain ones) and whether it's a live query or snapshot, which would help an agent decide.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining what the tool does, meaning the schema alone is insufficient. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate for no parameters.

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 states the tool generates a summary grouped by application status. It is specific about the verb and resource, and context from sibling tools helps distinguish it from listing or searching individual applications.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_job_applications or search_job_applications. The implied use is for aggregated statistics, but without stating exclusions or conditions.

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