get_query_page_detail_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states what the tool does ('Get detailed statistics') without explaining what kind of statistics, format of return data, whether this is a read-only operation, authentication requirements, rate limits, or any other behavioral traits. This is inadequate for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for what it communicates and is front-loaded with the core functionality.

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?

While an output schema exists (which reduces the need to describe return values), the description is still incomplete for a tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage. It doesn't provide enough context about when to use this versus similar tools, what the parameters mean, or behavioral characteristics. The existence of an output schema doesn't compensate for these other gaps.

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 0%, meaning none of the three parameters (site_url, query, page) have descriptions in the schema. The description doesn't add any semantic information about these parameters - it doesn't explain what format they should be in, what they represent, or provide examples. With three undocumented parameters and no compensation in the description, this is insufficient.

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 detailed statistics') and the target ('for a specific query and page combination'), which is a specific verb+resource. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from similar siblings like 'get_page_query_stats' or 'get_query_page_stats', leaving some ambiguity about how it differs from those 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_page_query_stats' or 'get_query_page_stats'. It mentions the specific combination of query and page but doesn't explain why this tool exists separately from those other tools or what unique value it provides.

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