sources_summary

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Get', implying a read operation, but no information about rate limits, authorization, side effects, or data freshness. The tool returns a summary report, but the description omits any behavioral details.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise and front-loaded with the action and resource. However, it may be too brief for the tool's complexity and sibling context, but structure-wise it is efficient.

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 (not shown), the description does not need to explain return values, but it fails to provide any context about what 'comprehensive traffic sources overview' includes. With many sibling tools, this lack of differentiation leaves the agent underinformed.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'counter_id', described as 'Counter ID'. The tool description adds no further semantics beyond the schema, which is sufficient but not enhanced. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 'Get comprehensive traffic sources overview and summary report' clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'traffic sources overview and summary report'. It implies a high-level aggregated report, but lacks specificity on what metrics are included, making it somewhat vague.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., get_traffic_sources_types, get_new_users_by_source). The description lacks context on prerequisites or alternatives, leaving the agent to guess.

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