mautic_list_stat_tables

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the endpoint path; it says nothing about what a returned 'stats table' looks like or whether the list is fixed or instance-dependent.

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 short fragments, front-loaded with the verb and resource, no filler. The endpoint restatement is marginally redundant but harmless.

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 zero-parameter, non-mutating discovery tool with no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It omits the one thing an agent still needs: that the result is a list of table names usable as input to the stats tools.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline applies and there is no parameter meaning to add. The description correctly implies a no-argument call.

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?

States a specific verb plus resource ('List available stats tables') and pins the underlying endpoint (GET /api/stats), so an agent can distinguish this discovery call from mautic_get_stats, which fetches stat data. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use text. The ordering is only implied: an agent can infer this should be called before mautic_get_stats to discover valid table names, but the description never says so.

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