openpanel_get_geo_data

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but fails to disclose read-only safety, rate limits, return format, or aggregation methods. It only mentions the environment configuration fallback for project_id.

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 consists of two efficient sentences with no significant redundancy. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is extraneous noise but does not substantially impact clarity.

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 5 parameters with zero schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks return value documentation and leaves 4 of 5 parameters completely unexplained.

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 0%, requiring the description to compensate. It only partially explains project_id's environment fallback behavior. It fails to document date_range syntax, valid breakdown values (beyond the 'country' default), or the site parameter format.

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 retrieves 'geographic distribution of users/visitors' using the specific verb 'Get'. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like openpanel_get_device_data or openpanel_get_overview_report by specifying the geographic dimension.

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 provides only a constraint about project_id being optional if environment-configured, but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus other OpenPanel analytics tools (e.g., when to choose geo data over device data or cohort reports).

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