get_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the exact output fields and database scale, setting expectations for what the tool returns. It clearly implies a read-only operation without stating it explicitly, but no side effects or hidden behaviors are expected for a stats tool.

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 clear sections (DATABASE SCALE, WHAT YOU GET, WHEN TO USE) and bullet points, making it scannable. It is slightly verbose with details like exact document count and model specs, but every section serves a purpose and the key info is front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. It even notes the scope of the database, giving the agent sufficient context to decide if this tool is needed.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds context about what the output means (e.g., sampleTitles are for 'understanding content types'), which is sufficient given no inputs are needed.

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 is a 'DATABASE OVERVIEW' and a 'health check', providing a specific purpose that distinguishes it from siblings like search_docs and get_doc. It lists what users 'get' (totalDocuments, model, dimensions, sampleTitles), making its function concrete.

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?

An explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section lists four distinct scenarios (first interaction, debugging, context setting, health check), giving clear guidance on when to invoke this tool. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, it frames usage as 'before searching', implying a complementary role.

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