get_stats_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It describes what the tool returns (totals, unique items, optional sections) but omits behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication requirements, or rate limits. Basic behavior is implied but not explicit.

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 sentence that packs key information: what it does and what it includes. It is efficient and front-loaded, earning its place without excess.

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 6 optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides a high-level overview but lacks details on return format or examples. It is sufficient for a summary tool but could be more complete, especially among many sibling tools.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context by mentioning 'optional top cities/zones/origins/timeline/peak data' corresponding to the 'include' parameter, but does not elaborate on each optional section or parameter beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves a high-level overview with specific elements like totals, unique cities/zones, and optional sections. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_stats_history or get_stats_cities, though not explicitly.

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 use for summary data but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_stats_cities or get_stats_distribution. No when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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