Get website stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not required to state it's read-only. It adds value by disclosing that a previous-period comparison is included by default, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not address rate limits, pagination, or data freshness, but these are less critical given the read-only annotation.

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 two sentences long, front-loads the main purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence contributes functional value (metrics list and comparison behavior).

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 19 parameters and low schema coverage, the description is somewhat thin. It covers the core metrics and comparison, but does not explain how the many filtering parameters work. The existence of an output schema partially compensates, but for a tool with numerous optional filters, more context on their interaction would improve completeness.

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 only 26%, so the description must compensate by explaining the purpose of the 19 input parameters. However, it only lists the output metrics, not how filters like os, tag, url, etc. affect the aggregation. This leaves a significant gap in parameter understanding for the agent.

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 provides aggregate metrics (pageviews, visitors, visits, bounces, totaltime) for a website over a date range, and mentions a comparison feature. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like get_pageviews, which likely returns only pageview data, or get_metrics for other metrics.

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 does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_pageviews, report_*). It gives no guidance on exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from context.

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