molt-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' and mention of 'statistics' implies a read-only operation, but the description omits details about whether counts are real-time or cached, performance characteristics, or if the operation is idempotent. It provides basic behavioral context (what data is accessed) but lacks operational details.

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?

Single sentence of seven words with zero redundancy. Information is front-loaded and dense, efficiently conveying the exact scope of the operation without unnecessary 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?

Given the tool has zero parameters, an output schema exists (covering return value documentation), and the operation is conceptually simple, the description provides complete context. The specific mention of 'documents and workspaces' aligns with the sibling tool ecosystem, providing sufficient context for selection.

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 has zero parameters, establishing a baseline of 4. With no parameters to describe, there is no additional semantic information required from the description, and none is provided.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'database statistics' and explicitly details scope (total documents and workspaces count). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling CRUD tools (read_doc, read_workspace) which retrieve individual items, and from health_check which checks system status rather than content metrics.

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 context by specifying aggregate counts, suggesting it should be used when needing statistics rather than individual documents. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or comparisons to alternatives (e.g., when to use this vs. iterating through read_workspace to count manually).

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