openpanel_get_top_pages

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. While 'top' implies sorting by view count descending, description lacks critical behavioral details: return value structure, pagination behavior, authentication requirements, or rate limiting. Does not disclose what constitutes a 'page' in this context.

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?

Extremely concise at 2 sentences with no filler. However, '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata leakage rather than descriptive content. Front-loading is adequate but brevity comes at cost of completeness given zero schema 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 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, this tool demands rich description. Current description inadequately covers parameter semantics, return structure, and behavioral constraints for a data retrieval tool of this complexity.

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 coverage is 0%, requiring description to compensate for all 4 parameters. It only partially explains project_id (optional if environment configured). Completely omits semantics for 'site' (expected format: domain? ID?), 'date_range' (format options beyond default '30d'), and 'limit' (max allowed values).

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), resource (top pages), and metric (view count). However, fails to distinguish from similar sibling tools like 'openpanel_get_page_views' or 'openpanel_get_paths_report', leaving ambiguity about when to choose this over alternatives.

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?

Contains no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings with similar analytics purposes. The note about project_id being optional relates to parameter configuration, not tool selection criteria.

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