get_site_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It adds a parameter constraint (days range 7-90) beyond the schema, and implies read-only behavior by describing aggregate stats. However, it lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or what happens with invalid input, leaving gaps in transparency.

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 front-loaded with a clear verb-object statement and structured with a Returns list and Args line. While efficient, the bullet list of metrics could be slightly more compact, but overall it is well-organized and avoids redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (many return fields) and the presence of an output schema, the description provides a comprehensive list of return values and usage guidance. It also documents the parameter. However, it omits behavioral details like performance impact or error handling, leaving minor completeness gaps.

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?

The schema provides only a type and default for the single parameter 'days.' The description adds meaningful semantics: 'Lookback period in days (7-90, default 7),' specifying the valid range and clarifying its purpose (time window for aggregation). This fully compensates for the sparse schema.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get aggregate site statistics and performance metrics.' It lists the specific metrics returned and explicitly distinguishes it as an 'overview of site health and trends,' which contrasts with sibling tools like get_anomalies or get_session_detail that target specific aspects.

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 description says 'Use this for an overview of site health and trends,' providing clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for more granular data, missing a stronger usage boundary.

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