Get Delivery Insights

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. The read-oriented verb 'Retrieve' and the note that results include 'zero-impression items' disclose real behavior, but pagination behavior, rate limits, and output characteristics beyond the metric list are left unstated.

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?

Two sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence is a dense list of supported options, but every item earns its place given the tool's complexity.

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?

For a tool with 10 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers purpose and key options while the schema handles parameter documentation. However, it omits when to use this over get_conversion_insights and gives no return-structure context beyond the metric names, which is a notable gap for an analytics query tool.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the schema already documents all 10 parameters thoroughly. The description mostly restates enum values the schema already provides (aggregation_level, time_granularity, segments), adding little new parameter meaning beyond confirming the default metric set.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve advertising performance metrics (impressions, clicks, spend, CTR, CPC, CPM)', which clearly identifies what the tool does. The tool name and listed delivery metrics separate it from the sibling get_conversion_insights, but the description never explicitly names that alternative, so it stops short of full sibling 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 enumerates supported options (aggregation_level, time_granularity, segments, zero-impression items) but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives. There is no mention of get_conversion_insights or any when-to-use/when-not-to-use condition, leaving tool selection entirely to inference.

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