SGU local archive stats

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

No annotations are provided, but the description implies a read-only operation by using 'report'. While it doesn't explicitly state non-destructiveness, the benign nature of a stats tool is conveyed. Slightly lacking full disclosure but acceptable.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the primary output (episodes count and date range) followed by usage guidance. Efficient and readable.

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 simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description adequately conveys purpose and usage. It could mention the return format, but not necessary for basic completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter meaning. Baseline 4 for no parameters.

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 reports the number of episodes and date range in the local indexed archive, using specific verb 'report' and resource 'local indexed archive'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search and retrieval by focusing on archive status.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use to check whether the archive is built and how complete it is', providing clear context and purpose. No ambiguity about when to use.

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