openpanel_get_overview_report

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. The note about project_id fallback behavior adds value, but description omits critical behavioral details: return format structure, data freshness/real-time nature, rate limits, or caching behavior typical for analytics reporting tools.

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 sentences with efficient structure: purpose statement followed by usage note. No redundancy. However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix lacks definition and the brevity comes at the cost of parameter documentation.

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 3 parameters (0% schema coverage), no annotations, and no output schema, the description should compensate with parameter meanings and return value structure. Currently insufficient—missing explanation of required 'site' parameter and what format/statistics structure is returned.

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%, requiring description to compensate. It partially explains project_id (optional when env-configured), but fails to describe the required 'site' parameter or the 'date_range' parameter (which has a default of '30d' in schema but no semantic explanation in description).

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 specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'overview statistics' and enumerates specific metrics (events, users, sessions, page views). However, lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools like 'openpanel_get_project_stats' or 'openpanel_get_usage_stats' which also retrieve statistics.

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?

Provides one usage note that 'project_id is optional if configured in environment,' implying when the parameter can be omitted. However, lacks explicit 'when to use vs alternatives' guidance comparing overview reports to specialized reports like cohort or retention.

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