get_short_url_visits

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no behavioral details such as pagination behavior or response format, but it does not contradict annotations. With annotations covering safety, a neutral score 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.

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

The description is a single, focused sentence with no fluff, front-loading the action and resource.

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 the seven parameters for filtering/pagination and the absence of an output schema, a one-line description is insufficient. The agent gets no indication of date filtering, bot exclusion, pagination limits, or expected return structure.

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 description coverage is 29% (only domain and shortCode have descriptions). The description does not mention any of the seven parameters, failing to compensate for the low schema coverage. Parameters like startDate, endDate, excludeBots, and pagination are left unexplained.

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?

Description states 'List visits for one short URL' with a clear verb (List), resource (visits), and scope (one short URL), distinguishing it from domain- or tag-level visit tools. However, it does not explicitly contrast with get_visit_stats, which also targets a single short URL.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling visit tools like get_tag_visits, get_domain_visits, or get_visit_stats. The description only states what it does, not the appropriate context or exclusions.

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