Get analytics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'rollups' framing and the view dimension, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as default period handling or precedence rules; those live only in the schema. No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the key view dimension is placed immediately after the resource. It is concise without being a tautology, though it prioritizes brevity over explanatory richness.

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 seven optional parameters, a rich output schema, and many sibling analytics tools, the description is too thin to fully orient an agent. Parameters and output shape are already covered by structured schemas, so the main missing piece is contextual guidance about when this tool is the right choice versus comparable alternatives.

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 high (86%), and the schema already documents view, period, date ranges, and user/group filters in detail. The description only restates the view enum values and adds the 'rollups' label, so it provides little semantic value beyond the structured 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 identifies the resource ('analytics rollups') and enumerates the available view modes, which is more informative than the generic title. It is specific enough to indicate this is an aggregated analytics tool, though it lacks an explicit verb and does not directly differentiate itself from sibling analytics tools.

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 gives no guidance on when to use get_analytics versus sibling tools like get_activity_summary, get_productivity_summary, or get_dashboard. The only implicit context is the view parameter, which is insufficient for an agent to reliably route between these overlapping analytics tools.

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