Get realtime activity

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which the description supports. The description adds critical behavioral context: availability varies by Umami version and it 'falls back gracefully.' This goes beyond the annotation by warning the agent about potential unavailability and fallback behavior, enhancing 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: two sentences that are front-loaded with the tool's purpose. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler. Ideal for an agent to quickly grasp the function.

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 output schema exists (handling return values), the description only needs to clarify the tool's purpose and unique traits. It does so by specifying the scope ('recent events/sessions/series') and version considerations. For a simple tool with one parameter, this is complete.

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% (only websiteId), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying how to obtain the UUID ('from list_websites'), which aids the agent in parameter preparation. This extra context justifies a score above baseline.

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 that this tool provides a 'richer real-time snapshot' for a website, listing specific elements (events/sessions/series). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_active_visitors (likely just visitor count) and get_events (raw events) by emphasizing richness and version-dependent behavior.

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 implicitly suggests using this tool for a comprehensive real-time overview ('richer'), but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus simpler alternatives like get_active_visitors or get_events. It mentions version-dependent availability and graceful fallback, providing some context but lacking clear guidance on selection.

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