chitchats_count_shipments

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the operation safe. The description adds the optional status filter context, but no additional behavioral details like rate limits or response format. It is consistent with annotations and adds some context, but not rich.

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 clear sentence with no filler. Perfectly front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 simple count tool with one optional parameter and a readOnly annotation, the description is sufficient. The return type (a count) is implicit in the verb, and the optional filter is mentioned. No output schema is needed for such a simple operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description's 'optionally filtered by status' adds no new meaning beyond the schema's filter description; it merely restates what the schema already says.

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 uses a specific verb 'get a count' with resource 'shipments', clearly distinguishing it from list_shipments and get_shipment. It conveys exactly what the tool returns and is not a tautology.

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 usage—when a count is needed rather than a list—but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It provides no guidance on when not to use it, so it stops at implied usage.

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