summarize_dataset_logs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does explain the effect of filters on scope, which is a behavioral trait. However, it leaves out details like whether the operation is read-only (though 'Get' implies it), what statistics are returned, or any potential performance implications. The description is not misleading, but it is sparse.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and then gives a clear conditional usage note. 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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain return values and operational context. It does not specify what 'aggregated summary statistics' includes (e.g., count, average, percentile) or which fields/operators are supported in filters. The nested filter object's allowed operators are not described, leaving significant ambiguity for an 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it repeats the filter guidance ('Pass filters to scope the summary; omit filters to summarize all logs') that is already in the schema's filter property description. The dataset_id parameter is not elaborated further.

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's function: 'Get aggregated summary statistics for logs in a dataset.' The verb 'Get' and resource 'logs in a dataset' are specific, and the mention of 'aggregated summary' distinguishes it from sibling list/detail tools like list_logs and get_log_detail. It also communicates the optional filtering scope.

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 provides usage instructions ('Pass filters to scope the summary; omit filters to summarize all logs'), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. The differentiation from siblings is implied by 'aggregated summary statistics' rather than stated outright.

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