get_database_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get', implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose what statistics are returned, whether additional permissions are required, or any other behavioral traits such as rate limits or response format. This minimal description leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 short sentence that immediately states what the tool does. It is concise, free of filler, and easy to parse. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 is the only source of information about what the tool returns and how it behaves. 'Get Redis database statistics' is too vague to be complete—it does not specify which statistics, the format, or how it relates to siblings like get_memory_info. For a tool with no parameters and an unknown output, this description leaves too much to the imagination.

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, so the input schema is empty and there is nothing for the description to clarify about parameter meaning. The description adds no param-level information, but none is needed. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameter-less tool.

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') and identifies a clear resource ('Redis database statistics'). It is unambiguous and matches the tool name, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_redis_info or get_memory_info, which could also return statistics. It clearly states what the tool does, though without distinguishing scope.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or alternatives. The only implied usage is that it retrieves database statistics, but this is not made explicit or compared with other tools.

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