get_dsp_performance

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

With no annotations, the description clearly states it is a read-only operation ('read') and explicitly warns it is a stub for introspection only, which sets expectations accurately. However, it does not detail rate limits, authentication, or the behavior of the hosted endpoint.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences covering purpose and deployment context with no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 (7 parameters, nested filters, no output schema), the description is adequate for a stub but lacks details on output format, pagination, or error handling. The explicit stub warning partially compensates.

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 description adds little beyond the schema. It provides high-level context (e.g., 'order, line item, and creative metrics') but does not explain parameter nesting or special filter behavior, earning the baseline score.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves Amazon DSP metrics for orders, line items, and creatives. The prefix '[Ads / read]' specifies it's a read operation, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like get_dsp_advertisers_live or get_campaign_performance by focusing on DSP performance data.

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?

Provides an important usage constraint by noting the tool is a hosted endpoint and this local server is an introspection stub, preventing misuse. However, it does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_campaign_performance or give criteria for exclusion.

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