marketplace_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and listing the contents (volume, tool counts, top performers) gives some expectation of return data. However, it does not explicitly mention side effects, authentication needs, or that it is a read-only operation, which could be useful for an agent.

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, clear sentence with no filler. It efficiently communicates the core function and what data is included.

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 (0 parameters, no output schema), the description is reasonably complete. It states the main return categories, though it could be slightly more detailed about the exact shape of the response or if any authentication is required.

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 the schema covers 100% (vacuously), so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed since there are 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 the tool's purpose: getting overall marketplace statistics. It specifies the resource (marketplace statistics) and lists key contents (volume, tool counts, top performers), making it easy to distinguish from more specific marketplace management and analytics sibling 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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like marketplace_tool_revenue or marketplace_creator_analytics. The word 'overall' implies a high-level overview, but no exclusions or comparison to siblings are given.

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