get_crawl_stats

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Retrieve' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explain what kind of statistics are included, whether data is historical or current, whether site_url must be a domain or full URL, or any access considerations. The output schema covers the return shape, but behavioral context beyond that is absent.

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 short sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word carries meaning, and there is no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

The tool is simple: one required parameter and an output schema are present, so the need for extra description is limited. Still, the description does not clarify site_url formatting or differentiate among the many sibling tools in the crawl-stats family, leaving an agent to infer the exact intended usage. It is minimally adequate but not complete.

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. It only loosely echoes the parameter by saying 'for a specific site' and does not define the expected format, normalization, or meaning of site_url beyond the parameter name itself. The single parameter is self-descriptive, which prevents a 1, but the description adds no real semantic value.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and names a clear resource ('crawl statistics') scoped to a site. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_crawl_settings or get_crawl_issues, so an agent may need to open schemas to pick the right one.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no exclusions or sibling references are mentioned. The phrase 'for a specific site' mildly implies scope, but it does not help an agent decide between this and the many related crawl/site tools.

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