pinterest_get_pin_analytics

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

The description explicitly states 'Reads only' and mentions the MCP_READ_ONLY context, indicating the tool is non-destructive. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or error behaviors. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden but only partially covers the safety profile.

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 concise sentence that delivers the core purpose without unnecessary fluff. It is well-structured and easy to parse, though it could include a bit more detail without becoming verbose.

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 description lacks important context such as the format of the analytical response, whether the tool returns a single aggregate or time-series data, and how to interpret the output. This leaves significant gaps for an agent attempting to invoke the tool effectively.

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 provides descriptions for start_date, end_date, and metric_types, while pin_id has no description but its meaning is immediately inferable. With 75% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description adds no extra semantic clarity beyond what the schema already offers.

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 that the tool provides pin performance analytics ('How a pin has performed'), which distinguishes it from general pin creation or listing tools. However, it lacks specifics about which metrics are included, but the core purpose is understandable.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternative pin-related tools like search or list. The description does not mention prerequisites, intended use cases, or conditions that would favor this tool.

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