Site analytics
get_analyticsRead-only
Daily page views per site for the last 30 days.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Output Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
shiply
by now.shiply
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Changed1 schema field changed
- changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#", + "additionalProperties": false, + "properties": { + "result": {} + }, + "required": [ + "result" + ], + "type": "object" +}
- First observed
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns daily page views for the last 30 days, which is useful but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as whether results are paginated or if historical data is mutable. The annotation carries the transparency burden, so a score of 3 is appropriate.
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 a single clear sentence, front-loaded with key information. Every word is necessary and nothing is wasted.
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?
The description explains what data is returned but leaves ambiguity: does it return data for all sites or a specific site? Without output schema details, the agent might not know the granularity. Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but could be more explicit.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description does not need to provide parameter details. The baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds no confusion.
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 states the tool returns 'Daily page views per site for the last 30 days,' identifying the resource (analytics) and scope (last 30 days). However, it does not explicitly use a verb like 'retrieve' or 'get,' and it does not differentiate from siblings, though no close sibling exists.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of limitations or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage context on its own.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.