reports_crash_rate_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'Query' (read operation) but does not mention pagination, authorization, rate limits, or the nature of the response. Parameters like pageSize and pageToken hint at pagination, but this is not described.

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?

Description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no waste. However, it could be slightly expanded to include more context without harming conciseness.

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?

With 8 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and many similar sibling tools, the description is too brief. It fails to explain return format, pagination behavior, or how parameters like timelineSpec and userCohort are used.

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 only 13% (only 'name' has a description). The description mentions dimensions, metrics, and filter but provides no explanation of how they interact or what values are expected. Most parameters remain opaque.

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?

Description clearly states the action (Query), resource (crash-rate timeline), and key components (dimensions, metrics, filter). It distinguishes from siblings like reports_crash_rate_get by indicating it is a query with multiple parameters.

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 querying crash-rate data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus similar siblings like reports_crash_rate_get or reports_anomalies_list. No when-not-to-use instructions are given.

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