analytics_queryExecute a single parsed GraphQL query with variables to retrieve read-only Cloudflare analytics data; no mutations or subscriptions.
One parsed GraphQL query only, with variables. No mutations, subscriptions or multiple operations. Permissions, dataset retention, sampling and query limits remain provider controlled.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | ||
| account | No | ||
| variables | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, but the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: only one operation per call and that permissions, retention, sampling and query limits are governed by the provider rather than the caller. That is useful, non-duplicative information about limits and execution semantics.
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?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with the single most important constraint (one parsed operation with variables). Every sentence carries weight; nothing is padded or restated.
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?
With no output schema, the description should at least hint at return shape, pagination or error behavior for an open-world analytics query, and it does not. It covers the core constraint and provider-controlled limits adequately, but an agent still lacks enough to predict results.
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 0% across 3 parameters (query, account, variables), so the description must compensate. It names 'variables' and constrains the query implicitly (single operation), but says nothing about the `account` parameter or the expected query string format, leaving most parameter meaning undocumented.
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 name/title establish reading GraphQL analytics and the description pins the resource further: exactly one parsed GraphQL operation, optionally with variables. It is clearly distinguishable from every sibling (all DNS/zone/ruleset tools), though the description never states the verb 'execute/run' explicitly, relying on the title to carry that.
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?
It supplies real exclusions — no mutations, subscriptions or multiple operations — which implies the intended read-only single-operation use case. It offers no explicit when-to-use framing or alternative routing, though no sibling competes for this purpose, so the gap is small.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.