Get Agent Statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds only the scoping phrase 'during a simulation' which is largely implied by the required simulation_id parameter. It does not disclose additional behavioral traits like return format or whether the simulation must be completed.

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, tightly worded sentence (9 words) that leads with the action and object. There is no redundancy, filler, or unnecessary explanation, making it appropriately concise for a simple one-parameter tool.

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 tool's simplicity (one required parameter, clear annotations, no output schema), the description offers a minimal but acceptable level of completeness. However, since there is no output schema, the description could have clarified what statistics are returned or which agent behaviors are covered, leaving some ambiguity.

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% — the only parameter, simulation_id, is already documented as 'The simulation ID.' The description's reference to 'during a simulation' adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and names a clear resource: 'statistics about agent behavior during a simulation.' This conveys the core function. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from other statistics-related sibling tools like graph_statistics or get_simulation_profiles.

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 the many simulation-related siblings (e.g., get_simulation_actions, simulation_history). No prerequisites, limitations, or alternative suggestions are mentioned. The description leaves the agent without selection criteria.

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