show_statistic

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

With no annotations, the description discharges the behavioral burden by stating 'read-only', which tells the agent the operation should not mutate state. It does not describe output format, scoping, or side effects, but for a zero-parameter query that is a reasonable minimal disclosure.

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 six words and contains no filler; it front-loads the resource and suffixes the safety qualifier. It is appropriately brief for a trivial tool, though it is somewhat terse.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, 'interface statistics (read-only)' is minimally sufficient, but it leaves unspecified what statistics are returned and how they are grouped. The large set of sibling statistics tools further increases the need for at least one clarifying sentence.

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 input schema is an empty object, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed.

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 names the resource ('interface statistics') and flags it as read-only, so an agent can infer this is a non-mutating display tool. It lacks an explicit verb and does not distinguish it from sibling statistics tools, but the resource is specific enough.

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 sentence or phrase indicates when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as show_traffic, show_flow, or sys_app_statistic. The only contextual hint, 'read-only', is a safety property, not a decision rule. Thus no usage guidance is provided.

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