bak_isos_statistics

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context: the returned counts are estimated and based on a representative sample, which informs the agent about data accuracy.

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 very concise: two short paragraphs. The first gives a clear purpose, and the second outlines the return structure. Every sentence is necessary and informative.

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 parameters and good annotations, the description provides a complete picture of what the tool does and what it returns. The output structure is described in detail, covering the JSON keys and their meaning.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema has 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. Baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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 it returns overview statistics of the ISOS inventory, with specific details like number of objects per canton. It is distinct from sibling tools such as bak_search_isos (search) and bak_isos_by_kanton (list by canton).

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 it is useful for a quick overview of the inventory scope, implying when to use it. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives, but the context is clear given the sibling tool names.

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