Get Timeseries

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., no mention of rate limits, data freshness, or any side effects). The 'spot trends' usage hint is minimal.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that first state the function and then provide a usage context. Every word earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 complexity (6 parameters, output schema exists, annotations present), the description is minimally adequate. It conveys the core purpose and usage hint but does not explain the time-series nature, granularity options, or how to interpret results beyond what the schema provides. An agent could use it correctly but may need to infer some details.

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 each parameter already has a description in the schema. The tool description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema provides. It aligns with page and site_id but does not elaborate on advanced usage or examples.

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 tool retrieves traffic and conversion metrics over time for a site or specific page, with a use case for spotting trends around deploys. While it distinguishes itself from sibling tools (compare_periods, get_breakdown, get_conversions) by focusing on time-series data, it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 specific use case ('spot trends and changes around deploys') but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives. Given the sibling tools, more direction on choosing between them would improve clarity.

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