get_conversion_path_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get', which implies a read operation, but does not disclose what data is returned, any limitations, permissions, or whether the operation is safe. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. It avoids unnecessary words, but is so minimal that it misses opportunities to add valuable context. It is efficient, though not as exemplary as descriptions that combine purpose with usage guidance.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and a minimal description, the tool is under-specified. The description does not explain what 'conversion path data' consists of, any filters beyond the two parameters, or what the response will look like. Given the breadth of sibling tools, more context is needed for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, with both customerId and dateRange described adequately. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, which is acceptable since the schema already provides full coverage. Baseline of 3 applies here.

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 uses a clear verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('customer journey conversion path data'). It clearly states the tool retrieves conversion path data, but does not differentiate it from similar reporting tools like get_conversions or get_conversion_attribution.

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 versus the many sibling conversion/reporting tools. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or alternatives. The description does not help the agent decide between this and near-neighbor tools.

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