ff form stats

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real context: the permission model, that reports may change via site hooks and version-specific provider behavior, and that results are not guaranteed lifetime revenue or all plugin statistics.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose before the caveats. Dense but each sentence carries information; no obvious filler.

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?

With no output schema and low parameter coverage, the description usefully covers permissions, environmental volatility, and scope limits. It leaves metric and account semantics unexplained, but overall it is complete enough for an agent to call the tool safely.

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 only 20%, so the description must compensate and only partly does. It clarifies date-range semantics and the form_id permission linkage, but metric, account, and the date formats remain undocumented in both places.

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 ('Read') and resource ('native date-range form statistics'), which is clear. However, it does not distinguish itself from the close sibling ff_form_report, leaving the agent to guess which stats tool to pick.

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?

It gives useful prerequisite guidance ('Requires form-scoped fluentform_entries_viewer when form_id is selected; all-forms permission otherwise'), which implies when it can be used. But there is no explicit when-to-use vs the sibling ff_form_report, and no exclusions beyond the scope disclaimer.

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