cluster_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions what information is returned (document count, storage size, index count, node info), it doesn't address important behavioral aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, potential performance impact, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The description provides some output context but misses critical 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?

The description is appropriately concise with three clear sections: purpose statement, parameter documentation, and return value description. Each sentence serves a distinct purpose with minimal redundancy. The structure is logical 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 single-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate basic information about what the tool does and what it returns. However, given the complexity of cluster statistics operations and the lack of output schema, it could benefit from more detail about the structure of returned information or performance considerations. The description covers the essentials but leaves gaps for operational use.

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 description explicitly documents the single parameter 'node_id' and indicates it's optional. With 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, this provides meaningful semantic context beyond what the bare schema offers. The description clarifies that this parameter allows filtering by specific node, which is valuable information not present in the schema.

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 states '获取集群统计信息' (get cluster statistics) which provides a clear verb+resource combination, but it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'cluster_health', 'cluster_state', or 'nodes_stats'. The purpose is understandable but lacks specificity about what makes this tool unique among cluster-related operations.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools that also provide cluster information (cluster_health, cluster_state, nodes_stats, cat_nodes, etc.), the description offers no context about when this specific tool is appropriate versus those alternatives.

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