direct_report

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

The description discloses that the tool is READ-ONLY, notes that conversions use 'soft Metrika' definitions, and warns that it may poll for about 1 minute. With no annotations provided, these behavioral details are valuable and go beyond a simple statement of purpose.

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 exceptionally concise, conveying key information in four short sentences. Every sentence adds value: purpose, conversion definition, read-only status, and latency warning.

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 covers the essential purpose, read-only safety, conversion nuance, and latency, which is helpful for a report tool. However, with no output schema and no mention of response structure or parameter filtering behavior, it is only partially complete for an agent to fully understand invocation.

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 description only references 'date range' and lists metrics, but does not explain the parameters campaign_ids or include_archived. The input schema provides descriptions for project and date formats, but with 60% coverage, the description compensates incompletely, leaving parameter semantics largely to 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 clearly identifies the tool as a campaign performance report, listing specific metrics (cost, clicks, impressions, CTR, CPC) and a date range. It distinguishes itself from sibling report tools like direct_report_raw and direct_report_breakdown by focusing on standard campaign metrics, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'fetch'.

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 retrieving campaign performance metrics over a date range, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like direct_report_raw, direct_report_breakdown, or direct_report_search_queries. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are mentioned.

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