get_channels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully communicate behavioral traits. It lists the metrics returned but does not indicate whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. It adds minimal information beyond what the parameter names imply.

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 a single, focused sentence. It is concise and front-loads the key purpose. However, it is somewhat terse and lacks structural elements like bullet points or explicit sections.

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 the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about the returned data structure and behavior. While it lists the metrics, it does not explain the format or any constraints. The tool has 3 parameters with full schema coverage, so completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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?

The input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description does not add new parameter semantics but lists the metrics, which are also described in the 'metrics' parameter's default values. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's function: providing effectiveness metrics (visits, leads, revenue, costs, ROI) for advertising channels. The verb 'get' is implied by the name, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like get_visits (likely only visits) and get_analytics (more general).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. The description does not mention alternatives or specific conditions, leaving the agent to infer usage without support.

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