List cached SiteLens reports as brief summaries, newest first, showing URL, analysis date, score, and module issue counts so you can pick which report to inspect or export.
List cached SiteLens reports as summaries only (url, analyzedAt, score, module issue counts). Newest first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it discloses the data source (cache, hence possibly stale), the reduced return shape, and the sort order. It omits what happens when the cache is empty or whether results are truncated, so it falls short of fully transparent.
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 short sentences, zero filler, and the return shape is front-loaded in parentheses where an agent will read it first. Every clause (cached, summaries only, field list, newest first) carries information.
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?
For a zero-param, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description supplies the critical missing piece: the exact fields returned and their ordering. Only the empty-result and staleness edge cases are unaddressed.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. The parenthetical field list describes the output shape, not inputs, and adds no parameter meaning because none exists.
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 opens with a specific verb and resource ("List cached SiteLens reports") and constrains the payload ("summaries only") with the exact fields returned. It clearly contrasts with fetching a full report, but never names the sibling sitelens_get_latest_report, leaving that differentiation implicit.
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?
"Cached" implies this reads existing local data rather than triggering a new analysis, which is an indirect usage signal, and "summaries only" implies there is a heavier retrieval elsewhere. However, no explicit when-to-use statement or named alternative (e.g., sitelens_get_latest_report) is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.