admin_get_queue_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, what exact data it returns, or any potential side effects. The phrase 'queue statistics' implies a read operation but leaves behavior vague.

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 short sentences with no redundant wording, front-loading the verb. However, it is so brief that it misses opportunities to add useful context without becoming unwieldy.

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?

With no output schema, the description must clarify what 'queue statistics' includes, but it does not. An admin tool like this would benefit from specifying return format or the type of metrics (e.g., queue length, task counts), leaving the description incomplete for a diagnostic context.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage vacuously. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but per the rubric, 0 parameters earns a baseline of 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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Celery queue statistics'), which clearly identifies the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from sibling admin stats tools like admin_get_worker_stats and admin_get_engine_stats by naming the exact subsystem.

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 only usage guidance is 'White team only,' which conveys access control but not when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context is given for when queue statistics are needed (e.g., diagnosing backlog) or when to prefer other stats tools.

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