get_stats

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. While it mentions the date range requirement and timestamp format, it doesn't address important behavioral aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination behavior, or what happens when filters return no data. The description provides basic operational context but lacks comprehensive behavioral transparency.

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 with just two sentences that communicate the core purpose and a critical implementation detail (Unix milliseconds). Every word earns its place, and the information is front-loaded with the main functionality stated first.

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?

For a tool with 18 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description provides adequate basic context about what the tool does but lacks completeness. It doesn't explain the return format, how the compare parameter affects output, what units the statistics are in, or how multiple filters interact. The description is functional but leaves significant gaps for a complex analytics tool.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all 18 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning the date range requirement and timestamp format, but doesn't provide additional semantic context about parameter interactions, default behaviors, or practical usage examples. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 summary statistics') and specifies the exact metrics (pageviews, visitors, visits, bounces, totaltime) for a website over a date range. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on summary statistics rather than active users, raw metrics, pageviews, or website listings.

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 the sibling tools (get_active, get_metrics, get_pageviews, get_websites). There's no mention of alternatives, prerequisites, or specific use cases that would help an agent choose between these similar analytics tools.

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