get--v3-domain-stats-total

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

No annotations are provided, and the description offers zero behavioral information. It doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only operation, what authentication might be required, whether it has rate limits, what format the totals are returned in, or any other behavioral characteristics. For a tool with 6 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is completely inadequate.

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 extremely concise (4 words), but this is more under-specification than effective brevity. While it's front-loaded with the core concept ('Totals'), the extreme brevity comes at the cost of providing any useful information. It's not verbose, but it's also not helpful.

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?

This is completely inadequate for a tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and numerous sibling alternatives. The description fails to explain what the tool does, when to use it, what the parameters mean, what behavior to expect, or what results will be returned. Given the complexity implied by the parameter count and sibling tool ecosystem, this description provides almost no useful context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for all 6 parameters (domain, start, end, resolution, duration, event), the description provides absolutely no information about what these parameters mean, their expected formats, or how they affect the 'totals' calculation. The description doesn't mention any parameters at all, leaving the agent completely in the dark about how to use this 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 'Totals for entire domain' is vague and tautological - it essentially restates the tool name 'get--v3-domain-stats-total' without specifying what kind of totals or what statistics are being aggregated. It doesn't clearly distinguish this from sibling tools like 'get--v3-domain-tag-stats' or 'get--v3-stats-total' which also appear to provide statistical data.

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 absolutely no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. With numerous sibling tools providing various statistics and aggregates (domain-aggregates, tag-stats, bounce stats, etc.), there's no indication of what makes this 'total stats' tool unique or when it should be selected over other statistical tools.

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