core_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only, non-mutating operation via the word 'snapshot', which is useful, but it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it mention behaviors related to the `_async` parameter. This is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that says 'Current stats snapshot' and then explains what is returned. Every word contributes; it is minimal and efficient with no filler.

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 simple stats tool with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key return content (bytes, speed, error counts). It does not explain grouping or async behavior, but those are well-covered by the schema, so the description is sufficient for basic selection and 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?

The schema provides full (100%) description coverage for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds meaning about return content (bytes, speed, errors) but not about parameter semantics; it does not compensate or go beyond the schema's parameter documentation.

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 returns a snapshot of active transfer statistics including bytes transferred, speed, and error counts, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool `operations_stat`, which likely serves a similar purpose, so it stops short of a perfect 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as `operations_stat` or other sibling tools. The description gives no context about typical use cases, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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