get_goals_conversion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The minimal description ('Track conversion rates for specified goals') does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, required permissions, rate limits, or any side effects. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it lacks detail, making it borderline under-specified. It earns its place but sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 existence of an output schema, the description could be minimal, but it omits crucial context such as time range, aggregation, and how conversion rates are computed. Without annotations or usage guidance, the description feels incomplete for a tool with many siblings.

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 100% (both parameters have descriptions in the schema). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the parameter names and types. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already defines the parameters, but the description does not enhance understanding.

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 'Track conversion rates for specified goals' clearly states the verb (track) and resource (conversion rates for goals). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_goals, but does not explicitly differentiate from other conversion-related tools like get_conversion_rate_by_source_and_landing. The purpose is clear but lacks explicit differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no when-not-to-use conditions, and no exclusions. With many sibling tools, this is a significant gap; an AI agent would need to infer usage context.

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