scan_field_stats

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

The description provides basic behavioral information (numeric vs text stats, max_features limit) but lacks disclosure of side effects, performance, or error conditions; since no annotations exist, more transparency would be beneficial.

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 well-structured with a clear summary, followed by detailed stats and parameter documentation, all in a concise format.

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?

The description covers the purpose, parameters, and basic behavior; with an output schema available, it provides sufficient contextual completeness, though minor aspects like error handling are missing.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description provides parameter explanations (path, layer, fields, max_features) that add meaning beyond the raw schema, though concise.

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 clearly states the tool computes descriptive statistics per field in a spatial layer, distinguishing between numeric and text fields, and is distinct from sibling tools like get_layer_schema or read_features.

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 for analyzing field statistics but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs. other tools or any prerequisites or exclusions.

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