Staats

What changed

what_changed

Read-only

Notable movements in the period without scanning raw numbers: statistically unusual traffic days, referrer surges and first-time referrers, pages whose share of traffic jumped, alongside the annotations recorded in the same period. period: '7d' default.

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.
`period`	No	relative period like '24h', '7d' (default), '4w'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`site`	Yes
`period`	Yes
`findings`	Yes
`annotations`	Yes

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

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 behavioral context by enumerating the kinds of statistically notable events returned and the inclusion of annotations. This goes beyond the structured annotation data without contradicting it.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is compact and packs useful detail into a single sentence with a clarifying list. The trailing 'period: 7d default' is slightly awkward but still earns its place as a quick reference.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a read-only analytical tool with an output schema and fully documented optional parameters, the description covers the main behavioral scope and even mentions annotation inclusion. It does not over-explain return values, which the output schema handles, but it could be stronger with explicit sibling routing.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description only restates the '7d' default for period, adding no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 description clearly identifies what the tool does: it surfaces notable movements in a period—unusual traffic days, referrer surges, first-time referrers, page share jumps, and annotations—without requiring raw-number scanning. This is specific enough to distinguish it from raw query tools, though it does not explicitly contrast it with siblings like what_broke.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'without scanning raw numbers' implies it is a high-level summary tool, but no conditions, exclusions, or sibling comparisons are provided.

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?