wb_analytics_history

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and does add meaningful behavior: data is aggregated by day and limited to the last week. It does not explain date semantics, response format, or error behavior, but the core behavior is visible.

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 a single compact sentence with the key qualifiers front-loaded: BY DAY, last week at most, conversion trends. There is no filler, and the Russian parenthetical adds clarification without redundancy.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, this description is too thin. An agent gets the core idea but not enough detail about parameter semantics, date format, response shape, or constraints beyond the week limit.

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% and the description never names nm_ids, date_from, or date_to. The phrase 'last week at most' gives some indirect meaning to the date parameters, but nm_ids is left entirely to inference and no formats or constraints are provided.

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 identifies a specific analytical resource (sales funnel) with a clear aggregation granularity (BY DAY) and an explicit time limit (last week at most). It lacks an explicit verb and does not name sibling tools, but the core purpose is distinguishable from related analytics tools like wb_analytics_grouped_history.

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 implies a use case ('for conversion trends') and sets a clear time constraint ('last week at most'), which helps an agent understand when the tool is relevant. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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