marketing_attribution_export_async_start

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

Description adds value beyond annotations by explaining async workflow and that identical params yield the same exportId. Annotations provide basic hints (readOnly, destructive), but description discloses behavior not captured there. No contradictions with 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?

Two sentences plus a spec link, all front-loaded with essential information. No extraneous text. Highly efficient.

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 and presence of annotations, the description covers async flow, filters, dedup, and response format adequately. No gaps identified for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. Description merely lists the filters without adding new semantics beyond what schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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?

Description clearly states verb (start), resource (async export of marketing-attribution data), and distinguishes from sibling async exports (licenses, transactions) by resource name. Mentions response format and filters, providing specific purpose.

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?

Explicitly describes the async flow: start returns id, then use status and download tools. Mentions parameter deduplication. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with siblings (e.g., sync export), but the context is clear enough for agent inference.

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