get_field_values_with_count

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions terms aggregation and server targeting but omits key behaviors like default time range, top limit, ordering, and filtering effects.

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 concise with front-loaded purpose and minimal extra lines, though the structure could be improved with explicit parameter sections.

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 8 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is too brief to adequately inform correct usage, despite the presence of an output schema.

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 0%, yet the description only explains 'index', 'field' (via example) and 'server', leaving 5 parameters (top, start, end, filters, order_by_count) completely undocumented.

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 distinct field values with counts (terms aggregation), with example use cases and a concrete example, distinguishing it from sibling 'get_field_values'.

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 provides example use cases ('top event codes', 'events per host') implying when to use, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison to alternatives like 'get_field_values'.

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