Export Clicks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the asynchronous nature via 'async ClickExport job' and notes that results arrive after completion, which adds behavioral context. However, it does not mention potential side effects (e.g., creating a job, required permissions, failure modes) or how timeoutMs affects polling, leaving a transparency gap.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and scope, and contains no redundant words. Every clause earns its place.

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 an asynchronous job mechanism and no output schema, so the description needs to explain the return format, job lifecycle, and the meaning of the timeout parameter. It only states 'Returns click rows once the export completes,' which is vague and does not clarify how the agent should handle long-running exports or interpret the result. This is insufficient for the tool's complexity.

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?

All four parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description mentions filtering by program/SubId, which aligns with the schema but adds no extra meaning. The timeoutMs parameter is not discussed, but its schema description covers it. Thus the description does not add value beyond the schema.

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 begins with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'List clicks for a single day.' It also mentions the async ClickExport job and that it returns click rows, clearly distinguishing it from single-click retrieval tools like get_click and other report exports.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: to export clicks for a specific day with optional filters. It does not explicitly describe when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it for bulk daily click exports.

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