remnawave_system_get_stats

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

No annotations provided. Description only states '(read)', implying read-only behavior, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or any side effects. Does not disclose that the tool may not be purely read-only given the mutationApproved parameter.

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?

Extremely short but under-specified. The single sentence does not earn its place; it lacks essential details for a 4-parameter tool. Not concise in a helpful sense.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns or the role of the parameters, leaving an agent with insufficient context to use it correctly.

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 0% and description provides no information on parameters. The parameters 'payload', 'confirmToken', 'responseMode', and 'mutationApproved' are unexplained. The presence of 'mutationApproved' contradicts the read-only hint, causing confusion.

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 mentions verb 'get' and resource 'stats', but 'stats' is vague and does not specify what system statistics are retrieved. It distinguishes from siblings only by being a 'system' tool, but there are other system tools like get_bandwidth_stats, get_health, etc., so purpose is not clearly differentiated.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Only '(read)' hints at non-mutating use, but no context on prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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