query_slow_rendering_rate

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that non-game apps produce errors or empty rows and explains the metric semantics. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe any potential side effects, though the query nature implies it.

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 concise yet information-dense, comprising two sentences that convey the core purpose, key metrics, usage restrictions, and parameter nuances. It avoids redundancy and stays focused.

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 covers the essential context: what the tool does, when to use it (games only), metric definitions, rolling average variants, and aggregation period. It does not describe the output format, but given the query nature and sibling tools, this is acceptable. The description is sufficiently complete for a user to decide when and how to invoke it.

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 description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the meaning of the metrics (share of users missing frame rate thresholds) and clarifying the aggregation period limitation (only DAILY). It also hints at the need to request weighted variants in the metrics parameter, which the schema does not explicitly cover.

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's purpose: querying slow rendering rate metrics for games. It explicitly names the metrics (slowRenderingRate20Fps, slowRenderingRate30Fps) and provides a precise definition, distinguishing it from sibling query tools.

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 explicit usage instructions: it is for games only and warns that other apps will yield errors or empty rows. It also advises using *7dUserWeighted / *28dUserWeighted variants for rolling averages and notes that only daily aggregation is supported, guiding the user on correct parameter usage.

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