apple_create_analytics_report_request

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden and does real work: it signals an asynchronous long-running operation ('the first reports take 1-2 days'), explains the ongoing vs one-time semantics of accessType, and warns of a uniqueness limit per access type. It omits auth/permission requirements and what response or error a duplicate request yields.

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 compact sentences: purpose first, then the enum effect, then the latency and rate constraint. Nothing is redundant and no sentence could be dropped without losing information.

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?

For an unannotated, no-output-schema creation tool the description covers what is created, the time-to-first-data, and the per-access-type limit. It stops short of describing the ONE_TIME_SNAPSHOT mode and the follow-up step of listing/polling the created request.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must fully compensate; it explains only ONGOING ('keeps producing daily data') and leaves ONE_TIME_SNAPSHOT's behavior and appId unaddressed. Helpful but partial for a two-parameter tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Ask Apple to start generating App Analytics reports') and enumerates the metrics produced, which immediately separates it from sibling readers such as apple_list_analytics_report_requests and apple_download_analytics_report. An agent can identify it without opening the schema.

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?

Use is implied ('Ask Apple to start generating...') and the constraint 'Only one request per access type is allowed' hints that existing requests should be checked first, but the description never names the enabling siblings or states when not to call it. A reader must infer the workflow from the existence of apple_list_analytics_report_requests.

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