Huawei App Gallery

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully documents the 180-day range limit (a key constraint not visible in the schema), but omits whether the URL is pre-signed/temporary, whether report generation is synchronous, or what occurs if the range is exceeded.

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 consists of two efficient, front-loaded sentences. The first sentence delivers the core purpose and output format; the second delivers the critical temporal constraint. No words are wasted, and the structure prioritizes actionable information.

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 100% schema coverage and absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the essential invocation context (purpose, format options, and date limit). It appropriately omits redundant parameter documentation while adding the crucial 180-day constraint. Minor gaps remain regarding URL expiration behavior and error conditions.

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?

Despite 100% schema coverage (baseline 3), the description adds value by contextualizing the 'start_time' and 'end_time' parameters with the 'Max 180-day range' constraint, and implicitly clarifying the 'export_type' parameter through the '(CSV or Excel)' parenthetical. This additional context aids in correct parameter selection.

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 action ('Get'), resource ('download URL for installation failure report'), and supported formats ('CSV or Excel'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from the sibling 'get_download_report_url', which could cause selection ambiguity despite the specific 'installation failure' qualifier.

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 the critical constraint 'Max 180-day range' which guides valid parameter usage for the date fields. However, it fails to specify when to use this tool versus the sibling 'get_download_report_url' or other reporting tools, and omits prerequisites like the optional environment variable fallback for app_id.

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