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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds the metric scope (clicks, leads, sales, revenue) which is useful context, but says nothing about return format, pagination, aggregation behavior, or required scopes for a 5-parameter analytics query.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, with the resource scope and metric list front-loaded before the endpoint reference. Nothing extraneous.

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?

For a read-only analytics query with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description supplies the essentials and even hints at the returned metric dimensions. It would be stronger with a note on default window behavior and the grouping/timeseries options, but nothing critical is missing.

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%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema (including the enum values for interval and the start/end-vs-relative-window distinction). The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get analytics for the partner programme') and enumerates the metrics returned (clicks, leads, sales, revenue per partner). This distinguishes it in scope from the sibling dub_get_analytics, though it never names that sibling explicitly, so it falls short of a 5.

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 phrase 'for the partner programme' implies when this tool applies versus general analytics, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no stated defaults for the optional time parameters, and no mention of the dub_get_analytics alternative. Usage is inferred rather than stated.

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