get_query_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get aggregate query statistics' without mentioning authentication requirements, the distinction between requestId-specific and aggregate results, time-range behavior, or the output format. It is not misleading, but it is far too thin for a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema.

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 concise sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource, though it sacrifices useful detail for brevity. Structure is clean and efficient.

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?

Given the tool has 7 optional parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and many closely related sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It omits when requestId should be used, whether the result is per-request or cross-request aggregate, and any authentication context. The schema covers parameter definitions, but the description fails to provide the needed operational context.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but the strong schema descriptions cover the semantics of from/to, authentication, baseUrl, and requestId.

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 verb ('Get'), resource ('aggregate query statistics'), and scope ('for a request'), which distinguishes its basic purpose from sibling tools like get_queries or analyze_slow_queries. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings or clarify the 'aggregate vs. specific request' semantics.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_queries, analyze_slow_queries, or get_query_stack_trace. The phrase 'aggregate query statistics' implies a use case, but there is no explicit context, exclusions, or alternative routing.

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