Staats

Get site context

get_site_context

Read-only

What a site is and what the owner wants from it, plus its data-retention settings. Well-known keys: description, goals, audience, notes (open agenda items to check at session start and clear when handled), events (event name -> meaning), funnel (canonical conversion steps). Read this before making recommendations.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	No	the site's data-site code, from its script tag or list_sites. Omit when the account has a single site. In a tracked project, read the code from the script tag before asking the user.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hint`	No
`name`	Yes
`site`	Yes
`domain`	Yes
`context`	Yes
`retention`	Yes

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful semantic context beyond that: the meaning of well-known keys, the session-start convention for notes, and the canonical funnel steps. This makes expectations about the returned content clear without conflicting with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and information-dense: it states the purpose, lists the well-known keys, and closes with a direct usage instruction. Every sentence earns its place and the most actionable guidance is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers content scope, key semantics, retention context, and when to call it. Nothing needed for correct selection or invocation is obviously missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the optional site parameter is already well documented in the schema with guidance about data-site codes and tracked projects. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning, 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.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The title and name make it clear this is a retrieval tool for site context, and the description specifies the resource: what the site is, what the owner wants, and data-retention settings. It is clearly distinct from update_site_context by implication, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like list_sites or funnel.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives explicit usage direction: 'Read this before making recommendations,' and the notes key adds session-start behavior by flagging open agenda items to check and clear. It does not state when not to use it or point to alternatives, but the timing guidance is strong.

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

All Staats tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool maps to a distinct resource or action: site management, site context, annotations, overviews, dimensional queries, funnels, journeys, and anomaly checks. Overlapping pairs like funnel/journeys are explicitly disambiguated in the descriptions, and what_broke vs what_changed cleanly separate problems from notable movements.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern such as create_site, list_annotations, and update_site_context, but funnel, journeys, portfolio_overview, what_broke, and what_changed break that pattern. The names are still readable and somewhat grouped by intent, but the mixed conventions make it harder to predict a tool's role from its name alone.

Tool Count5/5

At 15 tools this sits at the upper edge of the ideal range, and each tool earns its place: site lifecycle, context, annotation timeline, core analytics, discovery reports, and post-deploy checks are all covered. There is no obvious redundancy or filler.

Completeness4/5

The set covers site management, context editing, annotations, overview/query/funnel/journeys/portfolio analytics, and what_broke/what_changed checks, so most workflows have no dead ends. Minor gaps exist, such as no way to edit or delete a mistaken annotation and no explicit tool for updating data-retention settings, but these are workaroundable rather than blocking.

Resources

Need Help?