quickshell_stats

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It explicitly lists what data is reported (call counts, fetch vs cache hits, uptime) and mentions the 30-minute cache, which clarifies the meaning of cache hits. It implies a read-only operation without stating it outright, but 'report' strongly signals no side effects. Slightly better would be an explicit note that it does not mutate state, but the description is transparent about its output.

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 concise sentences. The first immediately enumerates the tool's output categories, and the second adds a practical usage context. There is no fluff or redundancy; information is front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, no output schema) yet the description fully conveys what an agent needs: what the tool reports, why it would be used, and the meaning of cache hits. The mention of the 30-minute cache helps interpret results. Nothing essential is missing for this diagnostic 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, so schema coverage is 100% and there is nothing to explain. The description adds no param details, but none are needed. A baseline 4 is appropriate given the absence of parameters.

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 states a specific verb ('Report') and resource ('session usage stats for this MCP server') and enumerates the exact contents (per-tool call counts, network fetches vs cache hits, process uptime). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools that retrieve content, making it obvious this is a diagnostic tool.

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 second sentence explicitly says 'Use this to check how much the server has been consulted and how much it hit the live site vs its 30-minute cache,' providing a concrete use case. Since no sibling tool offers stats, no alternative routing is required, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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