get_click_view_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation ('Get') but does not disclose permissions, rate limits, return format, pagination, or what exactly constitutes 'click-level data'. This is a minimal disclosure with no useful behavioral context.

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 short—one clause—and avoids fluff. However, it is under-specified rather than concisely informative. It lacks enough detail to be a model of tightly-packed useful information, so it earns a mid-range score.

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 tool has two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not mention what the report contains, how results are returned, or any filtering capabilities. For a report-fetching tool among many similar siblings, this description is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke it.

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 description adds no parameter-specific meaning. The schema already documents customerId but not dateRange. The description does not explain valid dateRange values or how parameters interact, leaving a gap for the undocumented parameter. With 50% schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 states a clear verb ('Get') and a resource ('click-level data'), but the purpose is vague. It does not explicitly mention 'report' or 'Google Ads', and it could be confused with sibling tools like get_conversions or get_search_term_report. It provides only a generic sense of retrieving click-related data without distinguishing from alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. An agent would not know whether to choose this over other report tools based on the description alone.

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