get_regional_data

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'get' implying read-only, but does not disclose any side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or return format. Minimal behavioral insight beyond the operation type.

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?

Single sentence with no fluff. Front-loaded with the key action and resource. Could be slightly more structured but remains concise and clear.

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?

Tool has only 2 parameters and an output schema exists, so description needn't detail return values. However, it doesn't explain what 'sessions and users data' entails (counts, metrics, time ranges). Adequate for a simple retrieval but lacks contextual richness.

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% with descriptions for both parameters ('Counter ID', 'City names to filter by'). Description adds no additional parameter context beyond what schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema covers parameters fully.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'get' and resource 'sessions and users data for specific regions/cities'. It specifies the scope (regions/cities) and distinguishes from siblings like get_visits or get_device_analysis by focusing on regional breakdown. However, it could be more explicit about what metrics are included.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_visits or get_geographical_organic_traffic. Usage is implied (when needing regional sessions/users data) but no exclusions or context provided.

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