get_session_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It clearly indicates a read-only operation ('Get'), and the examples suggest no side effects. However, it could mention that no parameters are needed and that it returns aggregate stats. Still, the lack of contradiction and clear read nature support a high score.

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, well-structured sentence that provides all necessary information without any fluff. Every word earns its place.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema presumably documents return details, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and what data it provides (speeds, counts, stats).

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?

There are no parameters (0), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by listing the kinds of statistics returned, which is useful beyond the empty schema. Baseline 4 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('session statistics'), and provides concrete examples (speeds, torrent counts, cumulative stats), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_torrent_stats which operate on individual torrents.

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 overall session-level data, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, such as mentioning that get_torrent_stats is for per-torrent stats. Still clear enough for correct selection.

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