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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains that clicks inside pages are not counted, that every page load counts including link-preview bots, and gives detailed semantics of each channel tag, including a warning about mis-tagging Instagram bio links. This rich context is valuable for correct interpretation.

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 front-loads the core purpose but then becomes a dense wall of text explaining channel taxonomy. Much of the channel detail is useful for interpreting output, but the explanation is verbose and includes a warning that seems aimed at a different context, making it less concise than ideal.

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?

Given that an output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description provides the necessary domain context for interpreting results—especially the meaning of each channel and the counting rules. It is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool returns and how to read the statistics.

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%, and the single parameter `days` is fully documented in the schema as 'Look-back window in days' with default and min/max values. The description mentions 'over the last `days` days' but adds no further syntax, format, or behavioral detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it returns visit statistics for the user's pages, broken down by views, daily views, channels, referrers, and countries. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_instagram_insights and get_page by focusing on page analytics rather than Instagram or page metadata.

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 explains what data is returned but never says when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_instagram_insights or get_account). There is no guidance on when to call it, when not to, or which sibling would be more appropriate in different scenarios.

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