kaiten_get_sd_sla_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses the async nature and the return of a compute_job_id, which is the most critical behavioral trait. It does not mention failure modes, permissions, or scope limits, but the core non-obvious behavior is covered.

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 sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, followed immediately by the critical async behavior and the exact polling tool to use. Every word earns its place.

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 an async statistics tool, the description tells the agent what it returns and what to do next, which is the essential workflow. It does not explain the shape of the final statistics result, and there is no output schema, but the compute job indirection makes that less critical for initial invocation.

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?

All 7 parameters have schema descriptions covering 100% of parameters, so the schema already conveys parameter meaning. The description adds no additional parameter-level context such as default behavior when filters are omitted or how filters combine, which keeps this at the baseline.

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 and resource ('Get Service Desk SLA statistics') and is unambiguous about what the tool does. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like kaiten_get_sd_stats or kaiten_get_sd_sla, but the async behavior noted in the next sentence provides a distinguishing detail.

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 clearly tells the agent the follow-up action: use kaiten_get_compute_job to poll results. This is concrete usage guidance for an async operation. However, it does not discuss when to choose this tool over related SLA/stats siblings or mention any preconditions.

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