Get Store Conversion Report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It states that rows break down by search term and UTM campaign and calls out that this is the only place either is available in Play's APIs. It doesn't discuss auth or rate limits, but for a read-only report with an output schema, the key behavior is covered.

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 compact paragraphs with the core metrics first, followed by the unique breakdown and sibling pointer. Every sentence earns its place; no filler or restatement of the input schema.

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 output schema and full parameter descriptions, the description supplies the missing context: what the report measures, the unique search-term/UTM rows, and which sibling to use for a narrower view. An agent has enough information to select and call the tool correctly.

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 schema documents package_name, month, and dimension at 100% coverage. The description adds value by explaining that underlying rows include search-term and UTM campaign breakdowns, which clarifies what the traffic_source dimension actually returns beyond a simple enum-like definition.

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 names exact metrics (store-listing visitors, acquisitions, visitor-to-install conversion rate) and highlights the unique search-term/UTM breakdown, distinguishing it from sibling reporting tools. The verb-resource pairing is specific and actionable.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to get_search_terms for the search-term-only view and positions this tool as the exclusive source for search-term/UTM breakdowns. This is a clear when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use contrast with an alternative.

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