ops_get_tracking_breakdown

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It tells to convert dates but omits read/write nature, pagination (limit/offset), filtering behavior, or whether it is destructive. Major gaps for a tool with 8 parameters.

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, no redundancy. Front-loaded with purpose, then a key instruction. Could be slightly more informative without adding length, but currently no wasted words.

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, no annotations, and complex sibling context, description is too sparse. It doesn't explain what 'funnels' means, output format, or how to correctly set date ranges despite the hint. Leaves many functional questions.

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, description should compensate. Only group_by is explained implicitly via the purpose; date parameters get a format hint. Other parameters (limit, offset, source, link_id, campaign) are completely unexplained.

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 'Compare campaign tracking funnels grouped by link_id, source, or campaign', specifying verb, resource, and grouping options. It differentiates from siblings like ops_get_tracking_summary and ops_get_tracking_trend by mentioning 'funnels', but lacks explicit contrast.

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?

Only usage hint is 'Convert relative dates to explicit RFC3339 timestamps before calling', which is helpful but doesn't explain when to use this tool versus siblings or when not to use it.

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