library_statistics

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation but does not disclose potential behavior like returning empty results, performance impact, or required permissions. The statement 'Get library statistics and overview' is minimal and does not add beyond the name.

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 4-word sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices informativeness for brevity, lacking details that would help an agent use the tool effectively. It earns its place but could be slightly expanded without verbosity.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should explain what 'statistics and overview' entails. It fails to specify the contents of the response (e.g., total papers, authors, categories). This incompleteness leaves the agent guessing, especially given the simplicity of the tool.

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, so the input schema covers everything. The description adds no parameter-level detail, which is acceptable. According to guidelines, 0 parameters baseline is 4.

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 library statistics and overview', providing a verb (Get) and resource (library statistics). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_library_papers or get_library_paper, though it could specify what statistics are included (e.g., counts of papers, authors, collections).

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. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. The sibling tools suggest various paper-level actions, but the description does not clarify that statistics are for the whole library.

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