get_offer_performance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states the tool returns 'computed performance', indicating a read-only analytical operation. It lists specific metrics and the optional breakdown. However, it does not mention authorization needs, rate limits, or return structure beyond metrics.

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 efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and optional feature without redundancy or extra words.

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 (2 simple parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate. It covers the core purpose and optional breakdown. It does not explain return format or pagination, but for a simple metrics tool, this is sufficient.

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 schema has 2 parameters (offerId, by). Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds value by explaining the 'by' parameter allows breakdown by segment or placement. The required offerId is self-explanatory. This provides minimal additional meaning over the schema.

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 verb 'get computed performance', the resource 'offer', and specific metrics (impressions, clicks, CTR, unique reach). It also mentions optional breakdown by segment or placement, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_offer' that likely return offer details rather than aggregated metrics.

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 implies usage for retrieving offer performance metrics but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling tool names provide some context, but no direct guidance on exclusions or prerequisites.

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