get_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 of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get summary statistics' but does not disclose what metrics are returned (e.g., call counts, durations, success rates), whether aggregation is across all users or filtered, or any permissions needed. This is a significant gap for a stats tool.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words, and the core purpose is front-loaded. It is efficient and doesn't waste tokens, though it is minimal in content. It does not repeat schema information, so it earns a solid score.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain the return value (what stats are included) and any operational context (e.g., date range format, limits). It fails to do so, leaving an agent with insufficient information to know what to expect or how to handle results. This is inadequate for a data-retrieval tool.

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%, and both parameters (date_from, date_to) are already described with type and format hints. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the period concept, which is already implied by the parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 the verb 'Получить' (Get) and the resource 'сводную статистику звонков' (summary statistics of calls) with a time period, making the core purpose clear. It is not a tautology and provides a distinct resource from siblings like get_calls (listing calls) and skill_stats (skill-specific statistics), though it does not explicitly distinguish them.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, with no context about typical use cases, exclusions, or references to sibling tools like get_calls or skill_stats.

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