create_analytics_report_request

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that ONGOING requests can take up to 48 hours for initial generation, then auto-update daily, and that existing requests are reused. However, it does not mention authentication needs, rate limits, or potential side effects.

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 two sentences and includes essential information (purpose, reuse logic). It is front-loaded with the key action and resource. Slightly verbose in Japanese but still 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 the absence of an output schema, the description explains what the tool does and the behavior (reuse, wait times). It positions the tool as the first step, which is helpful context. It does not detail return values or follow-up steps, but sibling tools imply the next actions.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds modest value by noting appId is obtained via list_apps and reusing ONGOING requests, but the schema already provides detailed explanations for accessType.

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 purpose: requesting generation of App Store Connect Analytics reports (impressions, page views, downloads by source). It specifies it's the first step in ASO analysis and mentions reuse of existing ONGOING requests, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_analytics_reports and get_analytics_report_data.

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?

The description indicates this is the first step for ASO analysis and explains when to reuse existing requests. It provides context but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives.

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