task.stats

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

No annotations are provided, and the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states that statistics are retrieved, without indicating read-only behavior, return format, scope, or any side effects. This is minimal disclosure for a tool that could implicitly be a read operation.

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 a single, direct sentence that conveys the core purpose without fluff. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what statistics are returned, but it merely says '통계' (statistics) without specifying count metrics, time ranges, or grouping. This is insufficient for an agent to predict the tool's output or behavior.

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 zero parameters, and the schema confirms this. Per the baseline for 0 params, a score of 4 is appropriate because there are no parameter semantics to clarify; the description correctly adds no param-related noise.

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 purpose: 'Task 전체 통계를 조회합니다' (retrieves all task statistics), with a specific verb (조회/retrieve) and resource (task 전체 통계). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like task.list and task.get by focusing on statistics.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as task.list or task.get. The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tools, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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