get_stats_distribution

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'Get' which implies a read operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether results are cached. The lack of transparency leaves the agent underinformed.

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, efficient sentence that covers the core functionality and key features (grouping, filtering, sorting, pagination). 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?

While the description summarizes the tool's purpose, it does not explain the return format (e.g., an array of groups with counts) or default behaviors beyond what the schema provides. For a tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 100%, with each parameter having a clear description (e.g., ISO 8601 date format, enum options). The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Get alert distribution'), the resource ('alert distribution'), and the two grouping options ('by category or origin'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_stats_summary and get_stats_history which serve different purposes.

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 implies usage for obtaining grouped distributions with filtering, sorting, and pagination, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings or provide exclusions. It offers moderate context but lacks clear guidance on alternatives.

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