dashboard_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for disclosing side effects. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state that no data is modified or that it is safe to call. The lack of explicit mention of non-destructive behavior leaves some ambiguity, though the intent is clear.

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, well-structured sentence that lists the key metrics returned without unnecessary verbosity. It is concise and informative. While it includes a list of many statistics, that is necessary to convey the scope of the dashboard data. No redundant phrases or filler are present.

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 there is no output schema, the description provides a good summary of what the tool returns (invoice counts, revenue, monthly breakdown, top clients, products, recent activity, payment summary). It also explains period options. However, it does not mention the format of the output (e.g., a summary object, a list) or whether any specific fields are guaranteed, leaving minor gaps in 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?

All four parameters are described in the schema with clear names (period, from, to, companyId) and descriptions. The description adds context on how to use period versus custom ranges, enhancing meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not clarify whether period is mutually exclusive with from/to, or what happens when both are provided, so it does not reach a perfect 5.

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 'Get comprehensive dashboard statistics for the selected company' which is a specific verb and resource. It lists the types of statistics returned, making its purpose unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from other reporting tools like reports_vat or reports_sales_analysis, so it falls short of a perfect 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?

The description mentions 'Supports predefined periods (month, quarter, year) or custom date ranges' which gives some usage guidance for the period and from/to parameters. However, it does not indicate when to use this tool versus other reporting alternatives, nor does it explain the relationship between predefined periods and custom ranges. Thus, it provides only partial usage context.

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