Analytics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. Against that lower bar the description still contributes by disclosing the shape of what comes back (totals, daily series, per-platform, top posts, posting-hour patterns) in the absence of an output schema, though it says nothing about pagination, cost or rate limits.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, and the payload contents are front-loaded before the routing guidance. Every clause earns its place.

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 no output schema the description usefully enumerates the return composition, and all three params are documented in the schema. The only gap is not relating this tool to get_post_analytics, a sibling an agent may equally need to choose between.

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 100% and the schema already explains range, timezone (including the 'rarely what the user means' guidance) and workspaceId. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 is correct.

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 names a specific verb+resource ('performance for the workspace') and enumerates the exact content returned: totals, daily series, per-platform breakdown, top posts and posting-hour patterns. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling get_dashboard, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

It gives an explicit routing rule with the alternative named: 'Use this over get_dashboard when the question is about trends, what performed best, or when to post.' That covers when-to-use and the alternative, but it omits the other obviously relevant sibling, get_post_analytics, and never states the inverse (when get_dashboard is preferable).

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