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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds significant behavioral context: the tool checks permissions, has business tier restrictions, and requires pre-authorization. This extra context is valuable and does not contradict 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 front-loaded with the purpose and followed by necessary usage guidelines. While somewhat verbose (e.g., repeating the interchangeability), the information is essential. The structure is logical, but the parameter omission reduces efficiency.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and complex preconditions, the description covers usage guidelines well but lacks parameter documentation and return value description. It is incomplete for a tool of this complexity; an agent would need additional information to invoke it correctly.

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 only hints at the 'filter' parameter by mentioning 'source or product analytics'. It fails to explain communityId, startDate, endDate, duration, productId, or isCommunityPage. This is insufficient for an agent to correctly fill parameters.

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 explicitly states 'Get analyticsV2 source or product analytics for a community,' clearly identifying the verb (get), resource (analyticsV2), and scope (source or product analytics). It clarifies that business and community are interchangeable, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_business_analytics_v2.

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 explicit when-to-use instructions: check business permissions, note that FREE businesses cannot use this tool, call check_business_tool_access before collecting inputs, and handle grace-period warnings. It gives clear preconditions and prohibitions, which is exemplary for guiding agent invocation.

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