tdarr_stats_get_running_worker_hist

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full responsibility. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but provides no details on side effects, data refresh behavior, or permissions. The user must infer safety implications.

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 short and front-loaded, but it lacks structure. One sentence is acceptable, but it omits important context, making it borderline under-specified.

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 tool's complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the history includes, how to interpret results, or any prerequisites, leaving the agent uninformed.

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 schema describes the 'timeframe' parameter as 'Timeframe for history', which is clear. The description adds no additional semantic context, so it meets the baseline for a 100% schema-covered parameter.

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 'Get running worker history' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (running worker history). It is a specific verb+resource pair and distinguishes from sibling tools like tdarr_stats_get_worker_verdict_hist, though it does not highlight the 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools, such as tdarr_stats_get_res_hist or tdarr_stats_get_worker_verdict_hist, the description fails to help the agent select the appropriate tool.

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