list_analytics_report_segments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that segments have presigned URLs, size, and checksum, and that one can pass a URL to download. However, it does not mention pagination behavior (limit parameter suggests optional limit), default order, or error conditions. It adds value beyond being just 'list segments' but lacks some behavioral details.

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 wasted words. First sentence states the action and output attributes, second sentence gives a clear usage hint for the next step. Perfectly concise for the information conveyed.

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 no output schema, the description covers the main output attributes (presigned URL, size, checksum). It also references the sibling download tool. It could be more complete by mentioning pagination outcome (e.g., returns a list that may be truncated due to limit) or error scenarios, but for a list tool of low complexity, it is sufficiently complete.

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%—both parameters have descriptions that explain their meaning (report_id comes from list_analytics_reports, limit has default and max). The tool description does not add additional parameter-level context, so it meets the baseline for high coverage. No extra value beyond schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'list' and clearly states the resource 'downloadable segments of an analytics report'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_analytics_reports (which lists reports) and download_analytics_report_segment (which downloads a segment) by mentioning presigned URLs and the next step to download.

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 implicitly tells when to use: to see segments of a report, then pass a segment URL to the download tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use alternatives, but the purpose is clear given sibling names. It provides a direct pointer to the related tool.

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