pinterest_get_pin_analytics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'Safe read' and that it works on 'one of our own pins,' which discloses the ownership requirement and read-only nature. It doesn't detail rate limits, error conditions, or return format, but for a simple analytics read, the provided transparency is above average.

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?

Two sentences, no waste. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, the second adds a crucial usage context. Every phrase 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and 100% schema coverage, the description covers purpose, safety, and a key usage context. However, it lacks a description of the return shape (e.g., a list of metric-value pairs), which matters since there is no output schema. Still, the overall completeness is high for a read-only analytics tool.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics by listing the exact default metrics (impressions, saves, pin clicks, outbound clicks, video views) and explaining the significance of outbound clicks in the Etsy context. This goes beyond the schema's bare parameter names.

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 tool returns engagement metrics (impressions, saves, pin clicks, outbound clicks, video views) for a single owned pin, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_pin (which likely returns pin details) and list_pins. The verb is implied ('get') but the resource and scope are specific.

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 gives context on when to use the tool: to measure native Etsy-driver traffic via outbound clicks, which is the traffic-lever signal. It doesn't explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, but the sibling list is limited and the analytics-focused purpose is clear. This is more than implied usage; it's a strong contextual cue.

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