basecamp_index_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral context. It explains the output (total projects, columns, last update time) but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention any prerequisites, performance implications, or whether the stats are cached. This is a minor gap for a read-only 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 entire description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and object. There is no redundant information, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 (no params, no output schema), the description covers the main return fields but is slightly thin on context like whether the statistics are live or from a cached index. Still, for its low complexity, it is mostly adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters and the input schema is empty. The description doesn't need to explain parameters; it already adds value by clarifying what statistics are returned, which is sufficient for a parameterless tool.

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 the specific verb 'Get' followed by the resource 'index statistics' and lists the exact data returned (total projects, columns, last update time). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling index tools like index_build or index_search, which perform different actions.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling index tools (e.g., index_get_project, index_get_columns). It does not mention alternatives or scenarios where this tool is preferred, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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