get_stats

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate those. It adds useful context by clarifying that the tool returns aggregate model statistics and the effective Drain3 settings rather than raw data or state changes, which is valuable beyond the annotation flags.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. Every word earns its place by identifying both the action and the exact content returned.

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?

For a parameterless, read-only stats tool with a rich set of annotations and an output schema, this description is fully sufficient. No prerequisites, side effects, or usage caveats are missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so parameter documentation is not needed. The description confirms the operation is a parameterless retrieval, and the output schema covers the specific returned fields.

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' and names an explicit resource: aggregate model statistics and effective Drain3 settings. This clearly identifies what the tool does and differentiates it from sibling tools like train_logs, match_logs, and save_state, which involve different operations.

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 this tool is for retrieving read-only statistics and settings, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose it over alternatives. There are no stated exclusions or condition-based routing to sibling tools, so the usage context is only inferred.

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