get_pageview_series

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the tool as a read operation ('Get'), but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or response format. However, the output schema exists to document the return structure, which partially compensates.

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 concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, followed by usage guidelines, then parameter descriptions. It contains no unnecessary words and is well-structured for quick parsing.

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 existence of an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, usage guidelines, parameter semantics, and unit recommendations. It could include error handling or rate limit information, but overall it is sufficient for a straightforward retrieval 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 0%, but the description provides clear semantics for all 5 parameters, including source for website_id, format for start_at/end_at (UTC), and valid values for unit and timezone. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type-only definitions.

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 'Get' and the resource 'pageviews-and-sessions time series', and specifies bucketing by hour, day, or month. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that return different metrics, such as get_active_visitors or get_website_metrics.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use each unit: 'Use 'hour' for short ranges, 'day' for medium ranges, 'month' for long ranges.' It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the context is sufficient for correct tool selection.

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