reports_errors_counts_query

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

No annotations exist. The description only says 'Query', implying a read operation, but does not disclose pagination, authentication requirements, rate limits, or output structure. This is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects or constraints.

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?

At one sentence, it is concise, but it is too brief; it sacrifices clarity and completeness. A bit more detail would improve without becoming 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?

With 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to construct the query, what dimensions/metrics are valid, or what the response contains. Essential context is missing.

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?

The input schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage in the schema itself. The tool description adds no explanation of parameters, leaving the agent to infer from names and the schema's own generic description. This fails to compensate for low 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 'Query aggregated error-count timelines' clearly states the verb and resource. It implies a query operation over error counts along timelines, distinguishing it from more specific operations like reports_errors_counts_get, though not explicitly.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as reports_errors_counts_get or reports_errors_issues_search. No context on prerequisites or when not to use is provided.

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