Traffic across Trood sites (admin)

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description discloses the admin-only access requirement, the data source (identity.trood.com/t.js), the visit definition, the cookie-less privacy model, and the bounded 50-event tail. These are real behavioural facts an agent could not infer from annotations or schema.

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?

Front-loads the access constraint and source before the metric list, and every sentence carries information. The metric enumeration is long but functional rather than padded; only the privacy sentence could be tightened slightly.

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 no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and meets it by listing the metric families plus the visit-counting caveat that determines how those numbers should be read. Nothing needed to call or interpret the tool is missing.

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 both `days` and `product` are already documented with defaults. The description reinforces the all-sites default ("every Trood site", "funnel per site") but adds no new syntax or semantics for either parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (first-party web analytics across every Trood site) and enumerates exactly what comes back: visits, page views, referrers, top pages, named steps, devices, per-site funnel, latest 50 events. That enumeration makes it unmistakable against siblings like get_user_activity or show_my_trood_data.

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?

"Use it to answer how many people came, from where, and where they stopped" gives an explicit usage context, and "Admin only" sets a prerequisite. It stops short of naming an alternative sibling tool or stating when not to use it.

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