get_custom_gam_report_by_domain

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the tool is read-only. The description adds valuable behavioral context: that dimension/metric combos must match GAM capabilities (or fail) and that revenue fields are in micros.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second adds critical constraints. Perfectly front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain return format, result limits, or how filter parameters (key, order_id, site_name) interact. Lacks details necessary for full tool usage understanding.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The description adds holistic context about dimensions and metrics being caller-chosen and constraints from GAM, plus revenue micros, which supplements 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 generates a custom GAM report for a specific domain with caller-chosen dimensions and metrics. It also distinguishes from sibling 'get_custom_gam_report_by_network' by focusing on domain scope.

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 implies usage for domain-specific custom reports but does not explicitly provide when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor mentions alternatives like 'get_report_by_domain'.

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