Plecs Statistics

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description isn't carrying the safety burden. It adds useful content scope (licence hints, open models and their states) but says nothing about cost, whether it queries a live session, or whether it can be slow with many models open.

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 fragment with zero filler; the two payload components are listed in the order an agent would care about them. Nothing could be removed without losing 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 zero params and an existing output schema, the description needn't document return shape, and it doesn't waste space doing so. The only real gap is the absence of any routing signal against closely related sibling tools.

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 the baseline of 4 applies and there is no parameter semantics to explain. The description correctly avoids inventing filters or options that don't exist.

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 (PLECS usage statistics) and enumerates what comes back: licence hints plus every open model and its state. That is materially more informative than the generic name 'statistics'. It loses a point because it doesn't differentiate from plausible overlaps like plecs_overview or plecs_instances in the sibling set.

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 statement of when to call this versus plecs_overview, plecs_instances, or plecs_get_model_tree, all of which plausibly surface model/state information. The agent must infer usage from the returned-content list alone.

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