get_term_statistics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states what is returned (counts, categories, distribution) but does not mention performance, authentication needs, data freshness, or any side effects. For a read-only statistics tool, this is minimal but acceptable; however, full burden on description warrants a 2.

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 extremely concise: two sentences covering purpose and return structure. Every word contributes value, and the key information (what it does, what it returns) is front-loaded. No wasted text.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values, but it still does succinctly. The tool is simple (no parameters, no nested objects), so the description covers the essential purpose and output. Minor omission: no mention of data scope (e.g., all terms or filtered). Otherwise 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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but it does describe the output, which is partially related. Baseline 3 is appropriate given no parameter information is needed.

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 retrieves statistics about the shipbuilding terminology database, specifying the return type (count of terms, categories, distribution). It distinguishes from siblings like get_term_detail or search_ship_terms, though not explicitly. A score of 4 reflects clarity without explicit sibling differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_categories_tool or list_terms_by_category. It does not mention prerequisites, when-not to use, or related tools. The context signals list siblings, but the description itself lacks usage direction.

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