get_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates the tool retrieves a 7-day rolling overview, implying a non-destructive, read-only operation. However, it does not disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, caching behavior, or whether data is real-time or computed. The description is adequate but lacks depth.

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, highly informative, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place. No unnecessary repetition.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should clarify return format. It lists what the overview includes (counts, breakdowns, etc.) but does not describe the structure (e.g., is it a JSON object with keys like 'story_counts'?). Adequate but not fully complete given the complexity of the output.

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 input schema is empty. Per guidelines, the baseline is 4 even with no param info in description. Description correctly does not add parameter details since none exist.

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 returns a 7-day rolling intelligence overview with specific breakdowns (story counts, region/category/country breakdowns, trending categories, top sources, highest-scoring stories). This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from siblings like get_stories or get_map.

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 implicitly suggests using this tool for aggregated intelligence summaries, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternative tools. For example, no mention of when to prefer get_stats over get_digest or get_map. Usage context is implied but not clearly defined.

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