capture_call_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does disclose one important behavioral trait — that output is aggregated rather than per-record — which is useful context for a summarization tool. However, it says nothing about permissions, read-only nature, the meaning of max_records at 1,000,000, or how the summary is shaped.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the aggregate scope front-loaded after the verb. Nothing is wasted, though the brevity comes at the cost of the missing detail noted elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. But with three entirely undocumented parameters, a required file_path whose format is unknown, and no annotation coverage, the definition is too thin for an agent to invoke it reliably.

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 description coverage is 0% for three parameters, with file_path required and max_records defaulting to 1,000,000. The description does not explain what file_path points to, what max_records caps, or what process_index selects, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented schema.

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?

"Summarize saved raw call streams" gives a specific verb (summarize) and resource (call streams), and the qualifier "without returning every record" distinguishes it from the record-returning siblings like capture_call_records. It is clear on its own, though it never names or contrasts those siblings explicitly.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance. An agent can infer it is the aggregate alternative to capture_call_records, but the description never states the condition (e.g. large streams, need for counts) or names an alternative tool.

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