Get Heatmap

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns performance metrics per cell, which adds useful context, but it does not mention any permissions, error conditions, or limitations. For a read-only tool this is somewhat acceptable, though richer detail would improve transparency.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and output. Every word earns its place; no unnecessary fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 description is adequate for a simple read tool but lacks depth. Since there is no output schema, the description only vaguely mentions 'performance metrics per cell' without detailing the grid structure or response format. It also doesn't mention default behaviors for days/cell_size, though these are in the schema. Overall, it's minimally sufficient but could be more complete.

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 all parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, but the schema already provides defaults, allowed values, and descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool gets heatmap grid data for a map and returns performance metrics per cell. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_funnel or get_insights by being specific to heatmaps and per-cell 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 this tool is for heatmap grid data, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. There's no mention of exclusions or when another tool might be better, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and description.

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