get_push_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It identifies the operation as a read ('get'), but fails to mention if it's safe to call repeatedly, requires specific permissions, or affects any state. This is insufficient for a complete behavioral understanding.

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, compact and to the point. It contains no unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly improved by including a brief description of the output, but it is still efficient.

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 the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about what 'summary statistics' entails and the nature of the response. It does not describe the return format or any constraints, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 100% description coverage for both parameters (app_id and campaign_id), so the description does not need to repeat them. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which aligns with the baseline of 3.

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 tool retrieves summary statistics for a specific push notification campaign in AppMetrica. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('summary statistics'), making the purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_push_campaigns or create_push_campaign, so it falls short of a perfect 5.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The description only states what it does, not when it should be chosen over other tools.

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