analytics_pagespeed_correlation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It only states 'correlate' without disclosing what actions occur (e.g., fetching top pages, making API calls), whether the operation is read-only, or what side effects exist. The lack of output schema or behavioral details leaves the agent guessing about return format or mutations.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No unnecessary words, and it is front-loaded with the key action and resources.

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?

The tool has 7 parameters (4 required) and no output schema. The description does not explain what the output looks like (e.g., table, correlation coefficient, chart), which is critical for an agent to process results. For a correlation tool without output schema, the description is incomplete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context by naming the two data sources ('GA4 engagement metrics', 'PageSpeed Insights scores'), but does not elaborate on parameter usage beyond what the schema already provides. The description adds marginal value.

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 correlates GA4 engagement metrics with PageSpeed Insights scores for top organic pages. It specifies the verb 'correlate', the resources (GA4, PageSpeed), and the scope ('top organic pages'), effectively distinguishing it from siblings like analytics_organic_landing_pages or pagespeed_analyze.

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 implies usage when a user wants to see correlation between engagement and page speed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it. No exclusion criteria or alternative tool names are provided.

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