get_churn_analysis

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does state that the return is a JSON string and lists the returned metrics, which is useful, but it does not mention error behavior, authentication, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only (implied by 'Get'). Since the output schema already covers the return format, this adds minimal behavioral context.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line summary followed by explicit Args and Returns sections. No wasted words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 simple two-parameter read tool, the description covers the purpose, parameter formats, and return type. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly, though it lacks contextual guidance on when to use it relative to siblings. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return values.

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%, so the description's Args section is essential. It explains that app_id accepts 'App GID or numeric ID' and is required, and it enumerates valid period values ('7d', '30d', '90d', '1y', or a date range). This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema titles.

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 'Get churn metrics: revenue churn %, logo churn %, uninstall reasons,' which clearly states the exact purpose and specific output fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_churn_risk and get_churned_merchants by naming distinct metrics.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as get_churn_risk and get_retention_cohorts are related, but the description does not mention when to choose this over those or any exclusions.

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