get_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states the return value: 'Dictionary with note count, task counts by status, and tag frequencies.' It doesn't mention side effects (likely read-only is implied by 'get') or any caveats, but for a zero-parameter stats tool, the output description provides adequate transparency.

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 extremely concise: two sentences front-load the purpose and then specify the return structure. Every word adds value, with no redundant or filler content.

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 parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient detail on what is returned (note count, task counts by status, tag frequencies). It could be slightly richer by mentioning whether statuses are filtered or if tag frequencies are top-N, but it is complete enough for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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, so the input schema is empty. Descriptions of parameters are unnecessary. The baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools applies, and the description correctly omits any parameter details.

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's function: 'Get an overview of the knowledge base: counts of notes and tasks by status.' This specifies the verb (get), resource (overview), and the kind of data returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling CRUD tools (add_note, search_notes, etc.) by focusing on aggregate statistics.

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 implies when to use this tool (for an overview/statistics) versus siblings which handle individual notes/tasks. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough that an agent would know it's for summary data rather than item-level operations.

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