get_stream_analytics

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 states what data is returned but lacks critical details: it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, mention rate limits, describe the format or structure of returned data, or indicate if it's a read-only operation (though implied by 'Get'). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that presumably accesses sensitive analytics.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and lists key data types without redundancy. Every word contributes meaning, and there's no wasted verbiage, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 complexity of analytics tools (which often involve permissions, data formats, and scope), the description is incomplete. With no annotations and no output schema, it fails to address authentication needs, return structure, or error handling. This leaves the agent under-informed for safe and effective use.

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 schema already fully documents the single optional parameter 'streamId'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as clarifying what 'current user' means or providing examples of stream IDs. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate but minimal value added.

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 purpose with specific verbs ('Get analytics and statistics') and resources ('streams'), and identifies the types of data returned ('viewer counts, engagement metrics, and performance data'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from potential sibling analytics tools, though none are listed among the siblings.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, timing considerations, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'get_current_stream' or 'list_channels', leaving the agent to infer usage context independently.

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