wb_analytics_region_sale

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by stating the maximum date span and the required date format, but it does not describe the output shape, aggregation level, timezone behavior, or whether the operation is read-only. It is minimally transparent but leaves meaningful gaps.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, stating the resource and constraints in a single line. The Russian parenthetical '(продажи по регионам)' is redundant with the English text, which is a minor inefficiency, but overall there is almost no wasted space.

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 simple two-parameter analytics tool, the description covers the essential invocation details: what data is returned at a high level, the allowed date range, and the date format. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it leaves unspecified details like the exact fields in the response, grouping granularity, and relevant alternatives among the many analytics siblings.

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%, but the parameter names date_from and date_to are self-explanatory, and the description adds important semantics by specifying the YYYY-MM-DD format and the ≤31-day span between them. It does not state inclusivity/exclusivity of the dates, but it compensates well for the empty schema descriptions.

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 names the specific resource ('Sales by region') and adds key constraints (≤31 days, YYYY-MM-DD format), making the tool's basic purpose clear. It does not use an explicit verb like 'get' or 'list', and it does not contrast with sibling analytics tools, but the core intent is unambiguous.

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 this tool is for retrieving regional sales data and provides a clear date-range constraint and date format. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over related siblings such as wb_stats_sales or wb_analytics_detail, and no exclusions or alternative routes are mentioned.

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