mac_fsck_apfs_stats

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

No annotations provided; description only states it 'gets statistics' which implies read-only, but does not disclose potential side effects, permissions, or performance characteristics.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded, but could include a brief note on the output format without becoming verbose.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should hint at return structure. Current description lists statistics content but lacks details on format (e.g., JSON keys, pagination). Adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 100%, but description adds no extra meaning beyond pointing to the log file path. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly identifies the tool as retrieving statistics from fsck_apfs.log and lists the types of statistics (devices, volumes, external devices, time range). Distinguishes from sibling mac_parse_fsck_apfs_log which likely parses full details.

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?

Description implies use for statistics on the log but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like mac_parse_fsck_apfs_log.

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