SplitLaunch

reports_experiment_chart

Read-onlyIdempotent

Return time-series experiment conversion data for agent analysis and summaries. Use this after reports_experiment_details when the user needs trend timing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	Optional ISO-8601 end date/time or YYYY-MM-DD date.
`from`	No	Optional ISO-8601 start date/time or YYYY-MM-DD date.
`goal`	No	Optional conversion event name to filter report results.
`interval`	No	Default: day.
`projectId`	No	Optional project ID. Omit only when the API key is project-scoped or the account has a clear default project.
`experimentId`	Yes

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds that it returns time-series data, but no further behavioral details like rate limits or auth requirements.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose, second gives usage guidance. No fluff.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Lacks output schema and doesn't explain return format beyond 'time-series data'. With 6 parameters and no output schema, more contextual detail on response shape would help.

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 83% (high), so baseline 3. Description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema provides for parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

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

Description clearly states it returns time-series experiment conversion data, which is specific and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning use after reports_experiment_details for trend timing.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('after reports_experiment_details when the user needs trend timing'), providing a clear alternative. Could mention more siblings but sufficient.

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

All SplitLaunch 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.

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action combination (e.g., domains_add, experiments_create, goals_deactivate, reports_experiment_chart). There is no overlap or ambiguity; even the three report tools serve clearly different purposes (totals, time-series, channel breakdown).

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a resource_action snake_case pattern (domains_add, experiments_list). A couple deviate (billing_portal, usage_summary) but still place the resource first, making the pattern predictable and easy to parse.

Tool Count5/5

With 23 tools covering projects, domains, experiments, goals, reports, billing, health, and usage, the count is well-scoped for a split-testing platform. Each tool addresses a specific need without ballooning into excessive granularity.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface provides CRUD-like operations for core entities (projects, experiments, goals, domains) and essential report types. Minor gaps exist (no goal update tool, no experiment delete—only archive) but these are reasonable trade-offs for the domain.

Resources

Need Help?