Get statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint true, and destructiveHint false. The description adds behavioral details: default aggregated output, special summary behavior for SEARCH_QUERY reports, tab-separated rows for others, and constraints. No contradiction with annotations.

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 relatively long but each sentence provides valuable information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then details specific cases. Minor redundancy could be trimmed, but overall it is efficient for the complexity.

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 (14 parameters, no output schema, special report behavior), the description covers all key aspects: default behavior, per-report differences, parameter roles, and output format (tab-separated rows, no header for most, computed summary for SEARCH_QUERY). It is comprehensive.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining how parameters like sortBy, topN, minCost, queryContains, zeroClicksOnly, and zeroConversionsOnly shape the summary report, and how fieldNames and Date interact. This enhances understanding.

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 explicitly states it requests a performance report via the Yandex Direct Reports service. It specifies the verb 'Request' and resource 'performance report', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_account_info or get_balance which retrieve different 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?

The description provides clear context for usage: it explains default aggregation, how to get day-by-day data, the rejection of ALL_TIME without campaign filter for certain report types, and the special shape of SEARCH_QUERY_PERFORMANCE_REPORT. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient.

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