d365fo_get_database_statistics

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

No annotations provided. The description describes the tool as read-only (getting statistics), but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or disclose performance implications. It adequately describes the output scope but lacks behavioral warnings.

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 structured with bullet points and a separate Args section, making it easy to scan. The bullet list of statistics categories is somewhat lengthy but front-loaded with the main purpose.

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 no output schema, the description returns 'Dictionary with database statistics', which is vague. However, all 4 optional parameters are explained, and the tool's scope is clear. Could be improved by detailing output structure.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description explains each parameter (e.g., 'include_table_stats: Include per-table statistics (row counts, sizes)') adding meaningful context beyond the schema's title and default values.

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's purpose: 'Get comprehensive database statistics and analytics'. It lists specific categories (e.g., overall size, table counts, cache hit rates), distinguishing it from siblings like d365fo_get_database_schema or d365fo_get_server_performance.

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 says 'Use this tool to understand the overall state and health of the metadata database' but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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