Get Import Stats

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

No annotations exist, so the description is the primary source. It correctly indicates a read operation returning grouped counts. It does not mention any side effects or permissions, but for a simple read-only stats tool this is sufficient.

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 extremely concise with two sentences—no fluff. The first sentence states purpose, the second provides 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?

Given the output schema exists (not shown) and the tool has a single optional parameter, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. It could briefly mention aggregation scope, but overall it's sufficiently complete.

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 schema covers 100% of the parameter with a description ('Project id'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns entry counts grouped by kind, module, and tag, specifying the verb and resource precisely. It also distinguishes itself by noting when to use it, differentiating from sibling tools that handle entries.

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 explicitly advises to use this tool after 'replace-entries/import' to verify catalog size. While it does not list when not to use it or name alternatives, the usage context is clear and helpful for the AI agent.

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