Analyze release impact

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive hints. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: default return format (compact summary vs full detail) and partial-window handling for recent releases, which are valuable for agent behavior.

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 sentences, each adding value: purpose, return format options, edge-case behavior. No wasted words, front-loaded with key action.

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 tool's complexity (11 parameters, nested filters, output schema), the description covers essential behavior and key decision points (summary vs full, partial windows). It could mention available filters, but the output schema exists so return values are not required.

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 low (18%). The description adds meaning for core parameters (e.g., releaseAt, windowDays, detailLevel) and the comparison concept, but many complex filter fields remain undocumented. It partially compensates but is insufficient for full clarity.

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 compares equal pre- and post-release windows across traffic breakdowns and Core Web Vitals, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like compare_traffic_series by focusing on release impact analysis.

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 makes clear it is for analyzing release impact by comparing time windows, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. Context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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