get_repo_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It correctly indicates a read-only operation returning stats, with no side effects. It does not explicitly state read-only, but the behavior is straightforward.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. The first sentence states the action, the second gives usage context. 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?

For a simple read-only aggregate tool with 0 parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It specifies what is returned (total count and breakdown by language) and the target repository.

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?

No parameters exist, and the schema coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter info.

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 it returns aggregate statistics for a specific repository, including total file count and breakdown by language. It distinguishes from siblings like get_file_skeleton (file structure) and search_symbols (search).

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to understand the tech stack and scale of the codebase at a glance.' This provides clear when-to-use guidance, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives.

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