get_dataset_event_statistics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the HTTP preference and fallback behavior, but does not mention if the operation is safe (read-only), destructive, or requires any authentication or permissions.

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, no wasted words, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value.

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, so description should hint at what is returned. It does not. Parameters are well-covered, but the return type/value is not mentioned. For a moderate-complexity tool with 3 parameters, it is partially complete.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds specific meaning for 'allow_copy' (fallback to xrdcp if HTTP fails) and implies that 'server' uses a default if not specified, enhancing understanding beyond 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 clearly states the tool aggregates event statistics across all ROOT files in a dataset, using a specific verb ('Aggregate') and resource ('event statistics across all ROOT files in a dataset'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_event_statistics' or 'get_statistics'.

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 provides a usage hint for the allow_copy parameter (HTTP preference and fallback), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_event_statistics' or other tools.

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