Collections Summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states what the tool counts and timestamps, but does not mention whether it is read-only, if it requires authentication, or if there are any side effects or limitations (e.g., rate limits).

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—only one sentence—yet conveys the tool's core purpose. It is front-loaded with the key counts and timestamps. No unnecessary words.

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 description lacks detail on the return format (e.g., structure of the counts object, how timestamps are represented). Given no output schema, this information would be helpful. Additionally, with many sibling tools, more context on distinguishing usage would improve completeness.

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 no parameters, which the schema reflects completely (100% coverage). The description adds value by listing the specific items counted (chats, collections, etc.), which is meaningful beyond the empty schema.

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 it returns counts and last sync timestamps for specific items (chats, collections, hashtag, memberships, unsorted). The verb 'summary' aligns with the tool's name. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like oe_collections_list or oe_collections_get, which could be used for similar purposes.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for getting summary data, but it does not state when not to use it or mention other tools that might be better suited for specific scenarios.

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