gbp_performance

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies read-only behavior but does not disclose data freshness, rate limits, or whether all metrics are always available. The return format is not described, leaving uncertainty about the structure of the time series.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and key metrics. No extraneous 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 no output schema, the description omits details on return structure (e.g., daily rows, aggregations). It covers the input parameters adequately but lacks guidance on interpreting the response or handling pagination.

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?

Input schema coverage is high (75%), and the description adds marginal value by enumerating metrics, which matches the enum. However, it does not explain the meaning of each metric or the expected date range format beyond what the schema 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 clearly states it provides a 'Daily performance time series for a location' and lists specific metrics (impressions, clicks, direction requests, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools like gbp_list_locations or gbp_list_reviews.

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. It does not specify prerequisites, such as requiring a location ID, nor mention situations where other tools (e.g., gbp_list_locations) should be used first.

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