Manager throughput statistics

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

The description accurately portrays the tool as a read-only statistics operation, matching the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations. It adds useful context about what the stats are used for, and no side effects or destructive behavior are implied or omitted.

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 two concise sentences with no redundant wording. It front-loads the resource and capability, then provides a brief, useful use case in the second sentence.

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?

An output schema is provided, so the description is not required to detail return values. The description covers the essential selection criteria—what kind of statistics are available and what they are used for—making it complete for an agent to decide when and how to call it.

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 single kind parameter has 100% schema coverage, and the description enriches each enum value with practical meaning: analysisd for capacity problems, remoted for agent-communication counters, and hourly/weekly for alert volume shape. This makes parameter selection unambiguous.

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 identifies the resource as manager event-processing statistics and names the specific subcategories (analysisd, remoted, hourly/weekly). It also gives a concrete diagnostic purpose—spotting dropped events and queue saturation—which differentiates it from general health or alert-listing tools.

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?

It explicitly states when to use analysisd stats ('to spot dropped events and queue saturation') and gives hints for each kind parameter. It does not enumerate when other sibling tools should be used instead, but the use-case guidance is clear enough for correct selection.

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