推广数据

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It does well: it warns that the tool will temporarily open the marketing center page, states the ~30 second runtime, and clarifies all returned values are plaintext. It could add prerequisites like login state or anti-bot risk, but the main behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 one front-loaded sentence: resource and default first, then the requested fields, then side effects and duration. Every clause adds useful information and there is no fluff.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned sections (units, account summary, daily spend) and the exact unit fields. The main remaining ambiguity is the vague '近几日' (which days) and no failure/empty-result behavior, but for a read-oriented data pull this is largely 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters already carry descriptions, enums, and defaults. The description's '默认昨日' only repeats the schema default and adds no meaningful semantic information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 opens with a concrete verb and resource ('拉取营销中心推广数据') and enumerates the exact data scope: all promotion units by spend/ROI/GMV/orders, account summary, and recent daily spend. It is unmistakable what data this returns, though it does not explicitly contrast against sibling promotion tools like pdd_promotion_detail or pdd_promotion_export.

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 indicates the default date and that it performs a live collection by opening the marketing center page, which implies it is for one-time data pulls. It gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions relative to sibling tools, so an agent must infer appropriateness from the tool name and field list.

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