One post, day by day

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/destructiveHint, yet the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: headless browser views are not counted, there is an ~1 minute rollup latency, dedup semantics (a reader counts once per post per day), and a required analytics.read grant. This is exactly the kind of context annotations cannot carry.

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?

Front-loaded with what is returned, then usage procedure, then counting semantics, then the auth requirement. Every sentence carries information, though the tracking-verification sentence is somewhat run-on and could be tightened.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must describe the return, and it does (views, unique readers, clicks, per day). It also covers the auth requirement and timing caveats an agent needs before calling. Nothing material is 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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents the from/to UTC-day patterns and their defaults plus the post_/prj_ id formats. The description adds only the 'per day' aggregation granularity, so it does not go beyond the structured fields. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names the exact resource and metrics: views, unique readers and clicks for ONE post, per day. The scope ('one post, per day') implicitly separates it from the sibling get_content_analytics, which an agent can see covers aggregate content rather than a single post.

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?

Gives a concrete when-to-use scenario ('check that a specific post's view landed after wiring up tracking') and the procedural preconditions (real browser, ~1 minute for rollup). It never explicitly names get_content_analytics as the alternative for broader queries, so routing between the two is left to inference.

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