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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a meaningful behavioral trait — the implicit 7-day default window — but says nothing about permissions, whether results are aggregated or paginated, or any limits on the returned rows.

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, purpose first and the fallback behavior second, with no filler. Everything present earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be explained, and all parameters are documented in the schema. The description covers purpose and default dates adequately; the only gap is guidance on report selection versus sibling Metrika tools.

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 the schema already documents sort, limit, date_from, date_to and project_id. The description adds the default date behavior beyond what the schema states, which is a modest increment; 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: analyze the geographical distribution of organic traffic from Yandex.Metrika. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_metrika_sources_summary or get_metrika_search_engines_data, though it does not name those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the analytic framing, and the description supplies a useful default ('last 7 days if dates not given'). However, it never says when to prefer this over other Metrika reports, nor any prerequisites (e.g., that the project must have Metrika connected).

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