get_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the content returned, which implies a read-only aggregate query, but it does not explicitly state that it does not modify data or that it reflects the current database state. The disclosure is adequate but not thorough.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the resource ('Messages database') and then lists the key statistics returned. There is no fluff or redundancy; every phrase adds informational 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only statistics tool with an output schema, the description provides sufficient context on what to expect: totals, counts, breakdown, and date range. No critical missing information is apparent; an agent can correctly decide when and how to invoke this tool based on the description alone.

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, so the schema is trivially complete. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining the kind of information returned, which is useful for an agent deciding whether to call it. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description earns it.

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 provides an overview of the Messages database with specific aggregate statistics (message/chat totals, unread count, attachment count, per-service breakdown, date range). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_chats or get_chat_messages, which fetch individual records rather than summary data.

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 when a high-level overview of the entire database is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or alternatives. The usage context is clear but left to inference.

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