reports_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read-only snapshot over a short window, but lacks details on default fields, aggregation, rate limits, or authentication needs. The behavioral insight is adequate but not deep.

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 extremely concise with three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: explaining the tool, providing usage guidance, and directing to further help. No unnecessary words.

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 simple two-parameter schema and output schema existence, the description provides sufficient context for basic use. However, it omits details on default fields and output format, relying on tool_help for parameters, leaving moderate gaps.

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 0%. The description does not explain the date parameters or their format, instead directing to tool_help. This offloading means the description adds little semantic value for the parameters.

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 clearly states it provides a quick per-campaign performance snapshot over a short recent window (~last 8 days, default fields). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool reports_custom, meeting the specific verb+resource and differentiation criteria.

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 explicitly says when to use (for a fast overview) and when not (use reports_custom for arbitrary fields, filters, or date/goal breakdowns). It even directs to call tool_help for parameters, providing excellent usage guidance.

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