umbrella_top_destinations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does convey that this is a read-only report, that results are ranked by request volume, and that an optional traffic-type breakdown exists. However, it does not disclose response shape, pagination defaults, or how 'most-requested' is calculated beyond the basic implication.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the core purpose, the time-range context, and the optional breakdown efficiently.

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 tool has six parameters, a nested object, and no output schema, yet the description is only one sentence. It does not describe what the returned report contains, how pagination behaves, or what typical use cases look like, leaving an agent without enough context to reliably parse or interpret the result.

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 schema already documents all parameters well. The description adds little beyond restating the time range and traffic-type breakdown, which are already present in the schema. This is the appropriate baseline since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 identifies the resource (destinations/domains), the time-range scoping, and the optional traffic-type breakdown. It is specific enough to distinguish from most sibling tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the similarly named umbrella_top_most_seen_domains.

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 states what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it over alternatives such as umbrella_top_most_seen_domains or umbrella_top_categories. There are no usage conditions, exclusions, or preferred scenarios described.

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