get_growth_velocity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a JSON string with weekly data and acceleration signals, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, authentication requirements, rate limits, or other side effects. The 'Get' prefix implies safety, but it is not definitive.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, an Args section, and a Returns section. Every sentence earns its place, and the front-loaded purpose ensures quick understanding.

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?

The description covers the core functionality and return value, and the existence of an output schema likely fills in the detailed return structure. For a simple analytics tool with two parameters, this is sufficiently complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining app_id as 'App GID or numeric ID' and weeks as 'Number of weeks to analyze' with a default of 12. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema and covers both parameters adequately.

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 uses the verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource: 'week-over-week growth trends with acceleration signals.' It distinguishes from siblings by highlighting acceleration signals and listing specific metrics (installs/uninstalls/revenue), making it distinct from related analytics tools.

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 implies usage for analyzing growth velocity but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or preferred sibling tools are mentioned, so the context is only implied.

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