analytics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions authentication and the type of data returned but does not discuss rate limits, pagination behavior, data retention, or error handling. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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 three sentences long, front-loads the action and resource, lists key metrics, and notes authentication. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 9 parameters (including cursor/limit for pagination) and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and metrics but omits mention of pagination, timezone handling, or auto-detection of timeframe. The schema fills some gaps, but the description could be more complete for a 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 100%, so the schema documents all parameters. The description adds context about the return metrics (latency percentiles, success/error rates) but does not provide additional meaning for individual parameters beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the action ('Get analytics data'), the resource ('for model endpoints'), and specifies the returned metrics (request counts, latency statistics, success/error rates). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'usage' by focusing on time-bucketed metrics and latency percentiles.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusion criteria, and no context about prerequisites beyond authentication. The sibling tools list (e.g., 'estimate_cost', 'generate') suggests different use cases, but the description does not help the agent differentiate.

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