get_entity_analytics

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It only states what the tool returns but does not disclose whether it is read-only, rate limits, or any side effects. The lack of behavioral context for an analytics tool is a significant gap.

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 very short (one sentence), but it sacrifices necessary detail. Conciseness should not come at the expense of completeness. It is under-specified for the tool's complexity (2 parameters, no output schema).

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It lacks parameter explanations, output format, any usage context (e.g., time range interpretation), and does not mention pagination or limits. It is insufficient for reliable invocation.

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?

The input schema has two parameters (days, limit) with zero description coverage. The tool description does not explain the meaning of these parameters, leaving the agent to guess their roles. This fails to add value beyond the schema.

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 states the tool retrieves entity mention analytics focusing on most mentioned entities over time. It uses a clear verb-resource pair and hints at temporal scope. While not fully distinguishing from siblings like get_entity_mentions, the analytics angle provides differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_entity_mentions or search_entities. No mention of prerequisites, appropriate use cases, or when not to use it.

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