get_click_details_report

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

With no annotations and a terse description, there is no disclosure of behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or response format. The description merely restates the tool name, providing no additional value.

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 very concise at four words, with no redundant content. It is front-loaded and easy to read, though the brevity sacrifices useful context.

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?

For a tool with six parameters and no output schema, this description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what click details report means, the expected output, or how to interpret the results, making it inadequate for an agent to use 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 input schema fully describes all six parameters with individual descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action (Get) and resource (click details report), so it conveys what the tool does. However, it doesn't distinguish itself from sibling report tools like get_display_report or get_conversion_details_report, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of other report tools. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent without direction on selection.

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