Get Analytics Overview

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that the return is aggregate data for a time period, which is useful, but it does not mention filtering behavior, whether defaults apply, or limitations. For a read-only aggregate tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 only two sentences and every word earns its place. It front-loads the key purpose, lists concrete metrics, and adds one clarifying sentence about aggregate data. No fluff or 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?

The tool has 21 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description must compensate. It only states that it returns aggregate data, but does not explain how filters interact with the aggregate result, whether the response is a single object or rows, or what happens if no time period is given. This is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke the tool.

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%, so each of the 21 parameters already has a descriptive label and format. The description adds minimal parameter-related value, only mentioning the time period generically, which is already covered by startAt/endAt in the schema. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 function: it gets high-level analytics metrics and lists them explicitly (visitors, sessions, bounce rate, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_timeseries or get_pages by emphasizing 'high-level' and 'aggregate', though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 implies when to use it (for aggregate overview metrics), but it does not explicitly contrast it with more granular sibling tools or provide 'when not to use' guidance. The phrase 'specified time period' hints at a common use case, but there is no mention of alternatives or exclusions.

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