get_time_series

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

Annotations already mark it as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds significant context: bucket auto-resolution logic, filter ANDing, date range presets, and optional site_id scoping. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with clear sections (purpose, bucket/site_id, filters, date range). It is comprehensive without being overly verbose, though some repetition of 'Optional' could be trimmed.

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 complex tool with multiple optional parameters and logic, the description covers everything needed: return format, bucket behavior, filter details with example, date range options, and defaults. Output schema exists, so return values are not needed.

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%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds value by explaining bucket auto-resolution, filter combination logic, and providing an example filter and date range presets.

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 it returns time-bucketed visitors/pageviews/events for a date range, one row per bucket. It distinguishes from siblings like get_breakdown and query_events by focusing on metrics over time.

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 explains when to use (time-bucketed data) and details optional parameters like bucket auto-resolution and filters. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use this tool.

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