get_product_qa_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it shows statistics, but does not mention any side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only. Without annotations, this is insufficient.

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 very short (one line), which is good, but it uses a dash and contains a slight redundancy ('Ver estadisticas de Product Q&A — Muestra estadisticas...'). It could be more streamlined, but it is still efficient.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about what statistics are returned (e.g., counts, top questions, time periods). It fails to do so, leaving the agent with minimal understanding of the tool's output or scope.

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 input schema is empty (no parameters), so the description does not need to explain parameter meanings. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3; the 0-parameter case justifies a 4 because there is nothing to clarify.

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 retrieves statistics for the Product Q&A plugin. It uses specific verbs and resources ('Ver estadisticas', 'Muestra estadisticas del plugin de preguntas sobre productos'). However, it does not differentiate from similar siblings like get_plugin_stats or get_product_qa_faqs, which could also return 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings. There are many related tools (e.g., get_plugin_stats, get_product_qa_faqs, get_product_qa_questions) that might serve similar purposes, but the description offers no context for selection.

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