get_kvp_report_by_domain

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

The description discloses that ad_exchange_line_item_level_revenue is in micros (divide by 1,000,000), which is a behavioral trait beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. However, it omits other behavioral aspects like pagination, data freshness, or potential performance implications.

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 extremely concise with two front-loaded sentences. Every sentence adds value: the first states the core purpose, the second provides a critical behavioral detail. No redundancy or fluff.

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 the complexity of 6 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It explains the grouping and revenue unit, but lacks details about return structure, error handling, or how to differentiate from sibling tools.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the parameters are already well-documented structurally. The description adds minimal extra meaning (e.g., revenue unit conversion) but does not significantly enhance understanding 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 that the tool returns KVP metrics for a domain grouped by a GAM key, specifying rows keyed by key/value with GAM ad-exchange metrics. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like get_kvp_report_by_network or get_session_kvp_report_by_domain.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks information on prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where this tool is preferable, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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