buygit_stats

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses that the tool returns aggregated, read-only meta information (no destructive actions). Could mention freshness or caching behavior, but still good.

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: first defines what the tool returns, second gives example use cases. No wasted words, 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?

For a parameterless tool with an output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know about the tool's purpose and when to use it.

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?

No parameters exist, schema coverage 100%. Description adds context about what the output covers, meeting the baseline of 4 for zero 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?

Description clearly states the tool provides meta statistics (total listings, license breakdown, top categories) and is distinct from sibling tools that perform searches or audits.

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?

Explicitly gives use cases: 'how big is the catalog?', 'what license is most common?', 'proving the curated catalog size before recommending it.' Implicitly suggests when NOT to use (for specific repo details, use other tools).

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