analytics_range_overview

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that the tool returns totals and transaction counts, but does not elaborate on additional behavioral aspects like result limits, performance, or handling of optional parameters. This is adequate but not enhanced beyond the annotations.

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 concise at three lines, but the 'Trigger words' line is somewhat redundant for an AI agent and could be omitted or integrated. Still, it is well-structured and wastes few words.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters with 2 required, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description covers the basic purpose and usage context but lacks details on optional parameters, return format, and how it differs from specific sibling tools like analytics_range_categories. It is minimally adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add meaning for the 4 parameters. It does not explain startDate/endDate format beyond what the schema pattern provides, nor does it clarify the optional paymentMethod and account parameters. This is a significant gap.

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 totals and transaction count for a date range. It uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as a date range overview, distinguishing itself from sibling tools like analytics_period_overview which likely deals with predefined periods.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use for custom start/end date spend totals, counts, and overall range questions.' It also lists trigger words to help with selection. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives.

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