get_bookmark_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions 'optional filters' but does not disclose behavior such as performance implications, data freshness, or effect on other data. The existence of an output schema mitigates the need to describe return values.

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 a single sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No wasted words, and the most important information 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?

With 7 parameters fully described in the schema and an output schema present, the description is sufficient for basic understanding. Some additional context about what kind of statistics (e.g., counts, distributions) is provided by the 'stat_type' parameter schema, so completeness is high.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides; it simply states 'with optional filters', which is redundant with the schema's 'description' fields.

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 'Get statistics about your bookmark collection with optional filters', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like search_bookmarks (which returns individual results) and list_tags (which lists tags).

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 use for aggregate statistics, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks guidance on when not to use it or mention of any prerequisites.

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