Agent Ledger stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful content context by enumerating the metrics returned, but says nothing about freshness, snapshot timing, or whether health figures are live — relevant given the openWorldHint.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource leads and the returned metrics follow in a tight list. Every clause carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully declares the four metric groups an agent will receive, which is enough to decide whether to call it. It stops short of describing response shape or timing, but for a zero-parameter read-only stats endpoint this is largely sufficient.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate and the schema is trivially complete. Baseline 4 applies for a no-argument tool.

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 names a specific resource (Agent Ledger) and enumerates exactly what is aggregated: registered agents, online-now count, per-platform counts, and service health. That verb-less noun phrase still clearly separates an aggregate-stats tool from siblings like ledger_list_agents and ledger_get_agent, though it never says so explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no precondition, and no mention of the sibling tools an agent might pick instead. The agent must infer that this is the dashboard-style summary versus the per-agent lookups.

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