avito_get_account_statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only a provenance note ('Plages identifiées dans l'APK Android') and no behavioral context such as auth requirements, rate limits, or data freshness, so with the lower annotation-adjusted bar 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?

Two short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. The trailing APK-provenance sentence earns only marginal value, keeping it just short of a 5.

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 no output schema, the description would ideally hint at which metrics are returned, but it only says 'métriques du compte'. For a single-enum read tool whose annotations cover the safety profile, this is adequate but leaves the return content unspecified.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the single parameter is an enum, so the description must carry the semantics. It does so by naming each range in prose ('aujourd'hui, les 7/15/30 derniers jours ou toute la période'), effectively mapping all five enum values including ALLTIME, though it omits mention of the default value.

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 ('Lire') and resource ('les métriques du compte') and enumerates the supported time ranges, so the agent knows this is the account-level statistics reader rather than a listing or search tool. It does not explicitly name a sibling to contrast against (e.g., avito_get_account), but the verb+resource combination is unambiguous.

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 usage by listing the available ranges, but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives among the many sibling tools. An agent must infer that this is the only statistics endpoint rather than being told so.

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