customer_insights_editions

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent, etc.), the description adds the response shape and the fact that certain filters are ignored. It provides context about the data structure and behavior without contradicting annotations.

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 with two clear paragraphs: purpose with response shape, then filtering behavior and link to spec. No extraneous words, front-loaded with key information.

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 provides an elaborate response structure example and a spec link. It covers filtering, grouping, and the data shape, making it fully adequate for a read-only 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?

Although schema coverage is 100% with basic descriptions, the description adds value by stating that only startDate/endDate work and that others are ignored, clarifying parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 specific verb 'distribution' and resource 'customer users by edition', clearly distinguishing from sibling 'customer_insights_regions' by noting the grouping. It also states the time granularity 'per month' and the set of editions.

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?

It specifies that only startDate/endDate filters are effective and that other parameters are ignored, guiding correct use. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like customer_insights_tiers or state when not to use this tool.

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