Get HitKeep Event Breakdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no new behavioral context—e.g., that it returns aggregated counts per property value, sorts results, or applies date filters. It merely restates the act of reading, adding no value beyond the annotations.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's function without any fluff or redundant phrasing. It is front-loaded and efficient, earning its place by delivering the core purpose clearly.

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 strong annotations, 100% parameter documentation, and an output schema present, the one-sentence description is adequate for a straightforward read operation. It doesn't cover every nuance, but the combination of schema and annotations fills most gaps, making the description sufficient for typical use.

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 all parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add any extra meaning about parameter usage, such as the expected format of property_key or the interpretation of from/to. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the high coverage.

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 does a read operation on a count breakdown for a single event property. The verb 'Read' is specific, and 'count breakdown for one event property' precisely identifies the resource and scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like hitkeep_get_event_names or hitkeep_get_funnel_stats.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or scenarios where this breakdown is preferable to other hitkeep_get_* tools. The agent is left to infer usage from the name and schema.

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