get_zone_analytics

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get analytics dashboard data' and does not explain whether this is read-only, what time-range defaults apply, what the response contains, or any limitations.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning: 'Get' names the action, 'analytics dashboard data' names the result, and 'for a zone' names the scope.

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 no annotations and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It does not clarify what kind of analytics are returned, how the time window behaves, or how it differs from sibling analytics tools, leaving an agent to guess whether this is the right endpoint.

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 100%, so the schema already documents zone_id, since, and until with meaningful descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-level details beyond implying zone scope, which is expected and acceptable at the 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 the action ('Get') and resource ('analytics dashboard data for a zone'), so an agent understands the basic operation. However, it does not differentiate this from sibling analytics tools like get_analytics_by_colo or graphql_analytics, so it stops short of a 5.

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 many analytics-related siblings. There is no mention of alternatives, exclusions, or conditions that would make this tool the right choice.

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