get_workspace_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 states 'Get detailed statistics' but doesn't specify what statistics are included, whether it's read-only (implied by 'Get'), requires permissions, has rate limits, or returns structured data. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely provides complex output.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool, with every part contributing to clarity.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, and the potential complexity of 'detailed statistics', the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what statistics are returned, their format, or any behavioral aspects like error handling, making it inadequate for an agent to fully understand the tool's operation.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'workspaceId' documented as optional and defaulting if unspecified. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as examples or context for the default workspace, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating value.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('detailed statistics for a workspace'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_workspace' or 'get_todo_stats', which provide different types of workspace or statistical information, so it lacks specific sibling distinction.

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 alternatives. With siblings like 'get_workspace' (for general info), 'get_todo_stats' (for todo-specific stats), and 'list_workspaces' (for listing), there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving usage ambiguous.

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