Get Top Pages Tool

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description carries a lower burden, but it adds nothing behavioral: no note on rate limits, pagination, result ordering, or how ties are broken. Nothing here goes beyond the annotation and the 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and metric, followed immediately by the one constraint that matters. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and defaults for limit/since/until are in the schema. However, with zero required parameters the description never says what happens if neither zone_id nor zone_name is supplied, leaving a real ambiguity about the tool's behavior.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds the mutual-exclusivity rule between zone_id and zone_name, which the schema does not encode (both are independently nullable). That is genuine added meaning for two of the five parameters.

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 (Get), resource (top pages), and ranking metric (request count), which clearly separates it from generic analytics siblings like get_zone_analytics_tool. It does not explicitly name or contrast with those siblings, so it falls just short of 5.

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 only guidance is the exclusivity constraint 'Provide either zone_id or zone_name, not both,' which is about parameter usage rather than when to pick this tool over get_zone_analytics_tool or get_traffic_by_country_tool. Usage is implied by the name and metric, not stated.

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