verified__service_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only describes the output (call/error counts and fees) but does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether multiple calls affect state, or any access requirements. The tool likely is idempotent, but the description does not confirm.

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 core description is concise: 'Call counts, error counts, and accrued fees for one service.' However, the prefix in brackets is unnecessary and wastes space, reducing conciseness. The description is not structured (e.g., no bullet points) but is short enough to be scanned 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It explains the output but omits how to use the service_id parameter and any return format. An agent would need to infer from the tool name or sibling tools, which is suboptimal.

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 input schema has one required parameter 'service_id' with zero description coverage. The tool description does not mention 'service_id' at all, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema. The agent has no clue what value to provide or how to obtain it.

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 returns 'Call counts, error counts, and accrued fees for one service,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like verified__list_services (which lists services) and verified__get_receipt (which gets a receipt). However, the prefix '[verified — tamper-evident delivery receipts ...]' adds branding noise that could distract from the core purpose.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as verified__list_services or verified__get_receipt. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing a service_id from list_services) or when not to use it.

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