analytics_channel_roi_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It says 'compute', implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly state whether it is destructive, requires specific permissions, or has rate limits. The description is insufficient to convey safety and side effects.

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?

Single sentence with no extraneous words. Front-loaded and directly states the core functionality. Every word 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?

The tool has one parameter and an output schema (not described). The description omits what the output looks like (e.g., a mapping from source_channel to rates). Given the simplicity, a brief note on return format would make it complete. Currently, it's missing key information for an agent to use the output 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?

The schema has 100% coverage (description for 'apps' parameter exists). The description adds value by indicating that rates are computed 'by source_channel', which is a field in each app object (default 'cold_apply'). This clarifies how the parameter is used but does not explain which fields (e.g., stage, stage_history) determine the rates.

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?

Description states it computes interview and offer rates by source_channel. This is a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from other analytics tools like analytics_funnel or analytics_list_apps. However, it does not define what 'interview and offer rates' mean precisely (e.g., conversion rates from application to interview, or interview to offer), which could cause ambiguity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools include analytics_funnel and analytics_list_apps, which might be more appropriate for different analytical needs. Without explicit when/when-not context, the agent may misuse the tool.

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