get_dashboard_stats

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read operation, so the description does not need to restate that. The description adds a little context by naming the kind of stats returned, but it does not disclose aggregation scope, time range, or whether the stats are global or user-scoped. With the annotation covering the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then gives concrete examples of the stats. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with a readOnlyHint annotation, the description is nearly complete. The only gap is that it does not specify whether the stats are global or scoped to a user/workspace, which could matter for an agent deciding between this and get_invoices. Still, the tool is simple enough that the description suffices.

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 has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. The schema is trivially complete at 100% coverage. The description's mention of 'totals due, paid, overdue' gives the agent a sense of what the returned stats mean, which is useful context beyond the empty schema.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('dashboard summary stats') and lists example contents ('totals due, paid, overdue, etc.'). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like get_invoices or get_customer_invoices.

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 this is the tool for high-level dashboard summary numbers rather than detailed invoice lists, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. An agent can infer usage from the phrase 'dashboard summary stats', but there is no direct comparison or exclusion.

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