get_pageviews

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: the data is coarse, approximate, and not a precise analytics signal. It discloses inherent limitations without contradicting the annotations.

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 two short paragraphs: one clear purpose statement and one concise caveat paragraph. Every sentence adds value, with the most important information front-loaded.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation. The description covers the key caveats (approximation, no per-post breakdown) and makes the tool's limitations clear. It is complete for a simple two-parameter read-only tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It partially does by referencing 'three coarse buckets' (matching the time_range enum) and 'Blog-level' (implying blog_id), but it doesn't explicitly describe each parameter. The schema names and enum values carry most of the parameter semantics.

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 'Blog-level pageview counts' with a specific verb and resource, and is clearly distinguished from all sibling tools, which focus on blogs, posts, pages, and comments — none of which cover pageview analytics. The additional 'no per-post breakdown' clarifies the exact scope.

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 clear context about what the tool returns and its limitations ('approximate', 'rough signal not analytics', 'no per-post breakdown'), which implicitly tells an agent when not to use it. No alternative pageview tool exists among siblings, so explicit exclusions are unnecessary.

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