splithub_analytics_paths

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the return shape (rows[] { value, visits }) and the special (exit)/(entrance) markers, but says nothing about permissions, pagination, result limits, or default time windows for an 8-parameter analytics query. Useful but far short of what a no-annotation tool needs.

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 short and front-loads the core question, but the return-shape fragment and nested parentheticals make it dense and slightly awkward to parse. Every element is relevant, but the packing of three ideas into one sentence hurts readability.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this is a fairly complex tool. The description covers the return shape and one enum, which is valuable, but omits date-range semantics, limits (days max 400), and filter/segment behavior — leaving real gaps for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is only 38%, so the description must compensate. It explains the direction enum ('with direction prev, where they came from') and implies page path formats, but says nothing about property, from/to/days date-scoping behavior, filters, or segment — leaving most parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific analytical question — where visits went (or came from) relative to a page, scoped to the visit — which is a clear verb-like operation on a defined resource. It doesn't explicitly name sibling tools like splithub_analytics_funnel or splithub_analytics_retention to differentiate, but the path/next-page semantics are distinct enough to identify the operation.

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 parenthetical 'with direction prev' hints at a usage variant, but there is no guidance on when to choose this tool over funnel, retention, or events siblings, nor any prerequisites (auth, property requirements). The agent is left to infer when this analysis is appropriate.

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