list_orphan_visits

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds the definition of 'orphan visits' but does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as pagination, date filtering, or default sorting, which are left unspecified.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It communicates the essential purpose efficiently, which is ideal for a tool of this simplicity.

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?

With 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It only defines what an orphan visit is, but does not explain pagination behavior, filter usage, or what data will be returned. Annotations cover read-only semantics, but that is not enough for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 0% and the description provides no explanation of any of the 5 parameters (page, startDate, endDate, excludeBots, itemsPerPage). The agent is left to infer their semantics from parameter names alone, which is insufficient.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the specific resource 'visits that did not resolve to a valid short URL'. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_non_orphan_visits and delete_orphan_visits, making the purpose self-evident.

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?

The usage is implied by the name and description: use this tool to see orphan visits. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives, nor any exclusions or context about typical use cases.

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