get_statistics

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

No annotations provided. The description does not mention side effects (read-only?), permissions, or rate limits. It only describes return format without addressing behavioral traits.

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?

Description is structured with a one-liner and docstring-style args/returns. It is clear but could be slightly more concise; still well-organized.

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?

Covers all parameters and mentions return format, but lacks error handling, prerequisites (e.g., account existence), and usage context for each scope. Given the output schema exists, return details are sufficient but not 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 0%, but the description provides detailed explanations for all parameters: account, scope (with three explicit values), sender, mailbox, and days_back (with default). This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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 'Get comprehensive email statistics and analytics' with a verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like 'get_inbox_overview' or 'get_top_senders', which could cause confusion.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., specific scope tools). The description implies usage through scope parameter descriptions but lacks explicit when-to-use instructions.

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