infomaniak_get_drive_statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the tool can read 'export endpoints', which introduces the export feature, but it does not explain what the export endpoint does or when it applies. No contradiction with annotations is present.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the main verb and resource, then a compact list of statistic families. No wasted words or redundant information; it is appropriately sized for the tool's scope.

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 read-only statistics tool with a detailed input schema and an output schema, the description provides a sufficient high-level overview. It covers what the tool does and the available statistic types, but lacks explicit clarification on export endpoint usage and comparison with sibling activity tools, leaving a small gap in fully self-contained guidance.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, including drive_id, statistic, query, and export, with clear meanings. The description adds value by translating the statistic enum values into concrete categories (storage sizes, activity summaries, user activity, shared-file activity, share-link activity), making it easier for the agent to map a user's intent to the correct statistic.

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 verb 'Read' and the resource 'kDrive admin statistics', then enumerates the statistic families: storage sizes, activity summaries, user activity, shared-file activity, and share-link activity. This specificity distinguishes it from siblings like infomaniak_get_drive_activities or infomaniak_list_drive_activity_reports, which target raw activities or reports respectively.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling activity-related tools (e.g., infomaniak_get_drive_activities, infomaniak_get_drive_activity_report, infomaniak_export_drive_activity_report). The phrase 'admin statistics' implies a summary use case, but the description does not state alternatives or exclusions, leaving the selection ambiguous.

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