coda_list_page_analytics

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by stating the owner-only restriction and specifying the metrics returned. This helps the agent understand access requirements and data scope.

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 concise sentences with the key action and details front-loaded. No unnecessary words or repetition; every sentence serves a purpose.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It adequately covers purpose, availability, and the nature of the analytics. However, it could mention that results are per-page, which is already implied.

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%, and the description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides for parameters. The description focuses on the output rather than parameter details, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool lists analytics data for pages within a doc, specifying the verb 'list', the resource 'page analytics', and the returned metrics (views, unique views). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on per-page metrics, though not explicitly naming alternatives.

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 a key usage constraint: 'Only available to doc owners.' This gives context on when the tool can be used, but it does not offer guidance on when to choose this over other analytics tools (e.g., coda_get_doc_analytics_summary) or when not to use it.

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