grain_topic_cluster

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool aggregates performance and returns top pages and queries, but omits details on read-only nature, side effects, authentication, or rate limits. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 core function and expected output. No extraneous information, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description provides a basic understanding but fails to specify return structure, pagination, or performance metrics included. The context about siblings is not leveraged to differentiate tool usage.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, which already explains pathPattern with the same example. 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 verb 'aggregate performance' and the resource 'pages matching a URL path pattern', with concrete examples like '/blog/' and '/guides/'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like analytics_top_pages by specifying aggregation over a path pattern rather than individual pages.

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 for path-pattern aggregation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. No guidance on exclusions or prerequisites is given, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context from examples.

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