Order statistics

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description carries real added burden and delivers: buy orders cap at 1000 rows, pagination is sell-only, and subdimension produces a nested `sub` object per row. It does not mention rate limits or auth, but the operational constraints it does disclose are valuable.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose in one sentence, then packs per-side field lists and constraint clauses with no filler. Every sentence conveys actionable information, including the otherwise-undocumented return fields.

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 21-parameter tool with no output schema, the description compensates well by enumerating the buy/sell return columns and the key constraint interactions. It omits the date-range limits (60 days / 90-day lookback) already in the schema, and does not route to sibling tools, leaving minor gaps.

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?

With 90% schema coverage the baseline is 3, and the description exceeds it by clarifying cross-parameter behavior the schema cannot express: the sub_id/domain restrictions, the requirement that subdimension differ from group_by, and that from/size/order_field/order_direction are inert for buy orders.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Statistics of one buy or sell order grouped by a dimension') and enumerates the returned fields per side, so the agent knows exactly what the tool produces. It does not explicitly name or differentiate against siblings like get_sub_id_report, get_balance_stats, or get_rtb_stats, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Provides concrete conditional rules: group_by=sub_id is sell-only, group_by=domain is unavailable for sticker sell orders, and pagination params apply only to sell orders. These exclusions tell the agent when the tool works, but no alternative tool is named for the excluded cases.

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