get_search_performance

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

With no annotations present, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool returns (search performance) without mentioning data freshness, required permissions, rate limits, pagination, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool that likely fetches external data.

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, front-loaded with the core concept. It wastes no words. However, it is in Spanish, which may reduce clarity for an English-focused agent. Still, it is not overly verbose.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description omits critical context: it doesn't specify what performance metrics are included (e.g., impressions, clicks), how to interpret results, or any sample usage. For a two-parameter tool, it leaves too much unsaid.

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 0%, and the tool description provides no explanation for the two parameters (asins and marketplace). The agent receives no guidance on input format, constraints (like ASIN format), or when marketplace is needed. This severely hinders correct invocation.

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 it returns search performance for ASINs in Brand Analytics, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_sales_and_traffic or get_search_terms. However, it uses the vague noun 'rendimiento' (performance) without specifying which metrics, so it's not a 5.

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 alternatives like get_sales_and_traffic or get_search_terms. There are no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or condition statements, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the tool name and short description.

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