get_approvals_count

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly states the tool returns a count, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as whether the count includes only approved approvals or any filtering logic. This is acceptable for a simple read-only count operation, but not richly transparent.

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 that efficiently states the tool's purpose without wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 tool with only three parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the core functionality. It could have mentioned the return format (e.g., a single number) or clarified that month and year are required together, but the schema covers the required aspects. Overall, the description is complete enough for its complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains the parameters. The description adds no extra parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline for full coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get the count') and clearly identifies the resource ('visitor approvals for a flat in a given month'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_visitor_approvals, which likely returns a detailed list.

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 when to use the tool (when you need just the count of approvals), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like get_visitor_approvals. Guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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