swapcard_export_analytics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and does disclose two meaningful behavioral traits not visible elsewhere: the ~10-minute data delay and the fact that results are cursor-paginated. However, it omits other potentially relevant behavior like rate limits, authentication, or data scope details, so a perfect score is not warranted.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. Every sentence adds value: what it does, the data delay, and pagination. Perfectly concise.

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?

Despite the tool's complexity (9 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, no output schema), the description is too brief. It covers only high-level behavior and omits parameter semantics, required parameters, response format, and edge-case guidance. The description is adequate only for the most basic understanding.

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 0% and there are 9 parameters, yet the description adds zero information about any of them. It does not clarify what 'events', 'cursor', 'time_gt', or 'user_ids' mean or how they should be used. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Export') with a clear resource ('raw analytics event records') and scope ('for one or more events'). It also adds distinguishing details like the ~10-minute delay and cursor-based pagination, which helps differentiate it from other tools in the sibling list.

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 when to use the tool: when exporting raw analytics events. It provides useful context (data delay, pagination) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives. This fits 'clear context, no exclusions.'

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