OpenPanel: Get overview report

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this is a safe read, so the description's job is to add context. It adds the source system (Insights API) and the exact metric set, but says nothing about aggregation granularity, timezone handling, or what happens when a site has no data — and with no output schema, the shape of the response is completely unstated.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the metric list in the most useful position and no filler. The bracketed "[UNIFIED]" tag is unexplained noise, but the sentence otherwise earns its space.

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 zero schema description coverage, no output schema, and heavy overlap with sibling reporting tools, the description is too thin: it never defines the required site identifier, the date_range semantics, or how the returned metrics are structured. An agent could pick this tool but would likely fumble the parameters.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does not: neither "site" (the required identifier), "date_range" (defaulting to 30d, with no accepted format such as relative strings vs ISO dates), nor "project_id" is mentioned or explained anywhere. The agent gets no help interpreting the one required parameter or the default window.

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?

"Get overview statistics including visitors, page views, sessions, bounce rate, and duration" is a specific verb plus resource and enumerates the metrics returned, which distinguishes it from narrower siblings like openpanel_get_page_views or openpanel_get_unique_users. The only ambiguity is the unexplained "[UNIFIED]" prefix, but the purpose itself is clear.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this rollup versus the many single-metric siblings (openpanel_get_unique_users, openpanel_get_device_data, openpanel_get_top_pages, openpanel_get_realtime_stats), nor any exclusion such as date-range limits or realtime-vs-historical. The agent must infer the choice from the name alone.

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