get_download_stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context by disclosing the conditional inclusion of eMule download/upload metrics (only when the eMule service is enabled), which an agent cannot derive from the annotations or empty schema. It does not describe refresh/caching behavior, but with an output schema present that is a minor gap.

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?

Two sentences, both earning their place: the first defines the payload, the second routes to the alternative. The primary capability is front-loaded and there is no 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?

For a zero-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, the conditional eMule case, and sibling disambiguation. Nothing an agent needs in order to select and call it correctly is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so by the rubric the baseline is 4; there are no arguments whose semantics need explaining. The description correctly adds no redundant parameter talk.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get current Download Station throughput statistics') and enumerates exactly what is returned (total download/upload speed across all tasks, plus eMule speeds). It also explicitly names the sibling it is not for ('For per-task speeds use list_downloads'), so an agent can separate it from get_download_info and list_downloads without opening a schema.

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?

Provides an explicit routing rule: use this tool for aggregate throughput, use list_downloads for per-task speeds. The alternative is named and the condition that selects it is stated, leaving nothing to inference.

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