get_pdf_index_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully inform behavior. It describes a read-only reporting operation but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or safe. Lacks details on response size, pagination, or performance implications.

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose. The 'Args:' section clearly separates parameter documentation. No redundant language.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, the description does not mention any prerequisites (e.g., existence of a PDF knowledge base) or how this tool relates to 'build_pdf_knowledge_db' or 'index_library_pdfs'. Adequate but not thorough.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explains the only parameter 'database' as a slug and states 'Empty = report all databases.' This adds critical semantic meaning beyond the schema's title and default value.

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 'Report indexing statistics for the PDF knowledge base' and lists specific outputs (per-database status, domain breakdown, un-indexed PDFs). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_library_stats' (general) and 'index_pdf_library' (action).

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 its use for checking PDF indexing status but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it. No guidance on prerequisites (e.g., requiring 'build_pdf_knowledge_db' to have been run).

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