dashbrr_get_autobrr_stats

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict this. The description adds the instance_id type-prefix requirement, but there is no additional behavioral disclosure such as return format, pagination, or side effects. Since the tool is read-only and simple, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the output metrics, the second provides the critical parameter constraint. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the most important 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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and parameter constraint. It lacks explicit usage guidance relative to sibling tools, but given the straightforward nature of a stats-fetching operation, this is nearly complete.

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 carries the full burden for the single parameter. It clearly explains that instance_id must be type-prefixed with an example ('autobrr-0'), which is essential for correct invocation. The example adds practical value, though the range of valid prefixes is not fully specified.

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's function: autobrr release counters with specific metric types (total/filtered/rejected/approved/error). It differentiates from sibling tools like dashbrr_get_autobrr_irc and dashbrr_get_autobrr_releases by naming the exact data returned.

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 retrieving release counters but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. It gives a parameter hint (instance_id format) but lacks context on appropriate scenarios or prerequisites.

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