pirsch_query_statistics

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Read', indicating a non-mutating operation, but provides no details on authentication, rate limits, pagination, or output behavior. For a complex analytics tool, this is insufficient.

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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every clause adds value. It avoids redundancy and is efficiently structured for quick comprehension.

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 the tool's complexity (39 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. It does not explain return values, how the various filters interact, or what the 'scale' parameter controls. The description only provides a high-level overview, leaving important context 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 only 23%, and the description adds little to compensate. It explains that domainId comes from pirsch_list_domains and lists high-level metric categories, but the 39 parameters, including many unannotated filters, remain unexplained. The description adds limited meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states it reads Pirsch Analytics v1 statistics for a domain and date range, with a specific verb ('Read') and resource. It also lists the supported metric categories (traffic, pages, events, etc.), which differentiates it from sibling tools like pirsch_list_domains and pirsch_get_domain.

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?

The description provides a clear prerequisite: 'Pass domainId from pirsch_list_domains to query a specific domain.' This establishes when the tool is used and how to obtain the required domain ID. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling tools are distinct enough that usage context is clear.

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