Get aggregate citation statistics for a project, including total citations, unique pages, unique domains, average position, top-three count, and citation class totals. Returns a coverage state: an unavailable window has not been rolled up yet and carries no stats, which is not the same as a measured zero.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| windowDays | No | Rolling window in days: 30 or 90. Defaults to 30. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
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 adds a valuable nuance about the coverage state, clarifying that an unavailable window has no stats rather than a measured zero. However, it does not mention side effects, permissions, or other behavioral traits, though for a get operation these may be assumed.
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 two sentences with no unnecessary words. The primary purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence adds a meaningful behavioral nuance. Every sentence earns its place.
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 simple get tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the return content and a key behavioral detail. It does not explicitly mention the default window or that it operates on the current project, but these are either in the schema or implicit. Overall, adequate for the tool's complexity.
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 fully describes the single parameter 'windowDays' with its enum values and default. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.
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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'aggregate citation statistics' with a specific list of metrics (total citations, unique pages, unique domains, average position, top-three count, citation class totals). It is specific and informative, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like devtune_get_citation_analysis, which may overlap in purpose.
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 alternatives such as devtune_get_citation_analysis or devtune_get_top_citation_domains. The description only explains what the tool does, not when to choose it over siblings, leaving the agent to infer usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
