generation_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses read-only nature, local database (not from ComfyUI), empty stats before generations, and aggregate output. It does not detail data freshness or limitations, but for a read-only stats tool, this is adequate and 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 short but packed with essential information: purpose, source, output, read-only nature, condition (empty until images), and sibling differentiation. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the main purpose.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the return type (various statistics). It covers key aspects: what data is returned, read-only guarantee, dependency on prior generations, and alternative tool. It is complete enough for a simple stats retrieval tool.

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 input schema already describes the single optional parameter 'model_family' with examples. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no extra value for parameter semantics.

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 shows statistics from a local generation-history database, listing total generations, unique combos, per-model-family breakdown, and most-reused settings. It uses specific verbs ('show statistics') and resource ('local generation-history database'), and distinguishes from sibling 'suggest_settings' by noting that tool gives concrete recommendations.

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 explicitly states it is read-only and works without a running ComfyUI, and returns empty stats until images are generated. It also mentions an alternative ('use suggest_settings') for concrete recommendations. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool beyond that, though context implies.

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