get_statistics

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

The description implies a read operation but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, nor does it mention any side effects, permissions, or error conditions. With no annotations, it should be more explicit about safety and behavior.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 that an output schema exists and the description lists the returned keys, it provides sufficient context for a simple tool. However, it lacks mention of prerequisites (e.g., an open document) or error handling, which would increase completeness.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description does not need to add parameter information and correctly focuses on the output.

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 it returns document statistics for the open document and lists the specific keys (word_count, character_count, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_word_count which return single values.

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 (e.g., get_document_info, get_word_count). The description implies it's for overall statistics but does not mention when not to use it or provide comparative context.

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