get_top_os

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates the metric (unique sessions) and that it returns 'top' items (implying sorting), but it does not disclose return format, limits, pagination, or any side effects. The operation is clearly read-only, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 states the core purpose. However, it omits essential context such as filtering options or default behavior, so its brevity comes at the cost of completeness. It is more under-specified than genuinely well-structured.

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?

The tool has 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, yet the description provides minimal context. It does not mention the flexible period/date parameters, filter parameters, or what the output shape is. For a tool with this complexity, the description is insufficient for an agent to use it correctly without additional exploration.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters and their meanings. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 specific verb and resource: it returns top operating systems by unique sessions. This clearly identifies the tool's core function. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_top_os_versions, which might be confused with this tool.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that get_top_os_versions is for OS-level versions or that get_top_countries is for country-level breakdowns. There are no exclusions or preferred contexts stated.

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