get_qianchuan_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only describes the content (metrics) but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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, with a clear title line and a structured argument list. However, the Chinese and English versions are redundant, and the overall length could be slightly reduced without losing clarity.

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?

Despite the parameter explanations, the description lacks details about the output format, pagination behavior, and any limits or error conditions. With no output schema, this leaves the agent without crucial information for handling the response.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage (all parameter titles are generic). The tool description compensates by explaining each parameter (advertiser_id, start_date, end_date, page, page_size) with formats and defaults, adding significant value beyond the 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 clearly states the tool is for Qianchuan ecommerce ad reports, listing specific metrics (impressions, clicks, cost, conversions, GMV, ROI). The name and description distinguish it from sibling report tools (e.g., get_campaign_report, get_ad_detail_report) by specifying the 'Qianchuan' platform.

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 provides the domain (Qianchuan ecommerce ads) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like other report tools. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the name.

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