Get link clicks for a broadcast

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the vague 'Reads account data', which hints at account scoping but does not clarify pagination, result limits, or how click data is aggregated.

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 very short sentences with the core action front-loaded and no padding. The second sentence earns little, but there is no verbosity to penalize.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain what a 'link click' result looks like (per-link counts, totals, date scoping), and it does not. For a data-retrieval tool with no output schema, the description leaves the return shape entirely opaque.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both the account and broadcast_id parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter formats or constraints, which is the expected baseline when the schema carries the load.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get link clicks for a broadcast'), which is clearly distinct from sibling stats tools like get_broadcast_stats. However, it makes no attempt to differentiate itself explicitly from those siblings, and the trailing phrase 'Reads account data' muddies rather than sharpens the 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all: no indication of when to prefer this over get_broadcast_stats, list_broadcast_stats, or get_email_stats, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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