Get XDaLa session statistics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what side effects exist, how it handles large windows, or any rate limits. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's runtime implications.

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 two sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately provide a useful example. No unnecessary words are included, and the structure is 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?

The description adequately conveys the tool's purpose and provides a usage example, but it does not outline the output format, the type of aggregation (e.g., counts vs. averages), or how the optional owner parameter affects results. Given the abundance of sibling tools, more detail would aid correct selection.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for parameters. The description partially compensates by explaining windowHours with a concrete example (336 hours for two weeks). However, the owner parameter is entirely unexplained, leaving its purpose ambiguous.

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 aggregates XDaLa session statistics with concrete examples like success/failure counts and average duration. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as get_xdala_session_timeseries or get_xdala_step_stats, which may also provide aggregated data.

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 clear guidance on when to use the tool (when the user asks for aggregate statistics) and includes a concrete parameter example for 'last 2 weeks'. It does not, however, mention when not to use it or list alternative sibling tools for specific queries.

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