chatwoot_get_bot_summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying that this is an aggregate 'overall' summary and naming the computed metrics, which helps the agent set expectations for output shape.

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 main sentence is concise and front-loaded, but the Args section is low-value and tautological. The description is compact, but not every line earns its place, and the argument comments could be omitted without losing information.

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?

For a read-only summary tool with optional parameters, full enum schemas, defaults, and an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It conveys the tool's purpose and key metrics, though it could clarify how this differs from get_summary or how period boundaries are interpreted.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters, but it fails to do so. 'period: Analysis period' and 'output_format: Output format' are essentially restatements of the parameter names and add no semantic value beyond the schema's existing enum values and defaults.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Returns overall bot performance' and specifies the exact metrics included: handoffs, autonomous resolution rate, and average response time. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on agents, teams, inboxes, or general summaries.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling performance tools, such as chatwoot_get_summary or chatwoot_get_agent_performance. It only states what the tool returns, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage from the name and metrics.

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