get_stats_tool

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' clearly implies a read-only operation, and the description does not mention any side effects, permissions, or limitations. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is safe or non-destructive, though that is strongly implied by the word 'get'.

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, brief sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then lists the specific outputs. It contains no filler or redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 that the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists (indicated by has output schema), the description covers all necessary context. It specifies what the dashboard stats include, and the output schema presumably details the return structure. The description is complete for this simple tool.

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, and the instruction specifies a baseline of 4 for such cases. The description adds no parameter details because there are none to clarify; the schema is empty and fully covers the input requirements.

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's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('dashboard stats'), and enumerates the exact data it returns (total feeds, unread count, entries per category). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_feeds or list_entries, which are listing operations rather than summaries.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention that this tool is suitable for an overview or that it should be used instead of counting entries via list_entries. Usage is only implied by the name and purpose, but no exclusions or alternative references are given.

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