get_platform_stats_overview

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions 'Cached 30s', which is useful but insufficient. It does not specify if the tool is read-only, the nature of aggregation, or any side effects.

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?

A single sentence, efficient and front-loaded with key information. No wasted words.

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 no output schema and a broad scope, the description could be more complete (e.g., what format the stats are in, whether it returns a single object). However, for a zero-param overview tool, it provides adequate context. It lacks detail on the structure of the response.

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 input schema has no parameters (0 params), so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter info; baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 returns 'comprehensive platform stats' and lists specific categories (pipeline health, LLM performance, totals, service health). This makes the purpose clear, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling stats tools like get_metrics_overview.

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 on when to use this tool versus specific metrics tools (e.g., get_metrics_llm, get_system_health). It mentions caching but doesn't provide context on appropriate usage or alternatives.

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