app_analysis_demographics

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

No annotations are provided, leaving the description to carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states a 'Get' action, implying a read operation, but does not disclose whether it is safe, what data is returned, any rate limits, or whether it requires specific permissions. This is a significant gap for a data-retrieval tool.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it is under-specified to the point of being a fragment. It saves space but fails to earn its place by not providing enough information to be useful. It is neither well-structured nor adequately informative.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description is minimal—just a vague one-liner. It does not explain what demographic dimensions are reported, how the parameters interact, or what the response might look like. For a tool of this complexity, the description is clearly incomplete.

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%, with each parameter having a basic description (e.g., 'Operating system', 'Comma-separated app IDs'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself is adequate. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 'Get demographic analysis data for apps' uses a clear verb and identifies the resource, but is vague about what 'demographic analysis' entails (e.g., age, gender, location) and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like app_analysis_retention or downloads_by_sources. It communicates the basic purpose but lacks specificity.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes several analysis-focused tools, but the description offers no context, prerequisites, or exclusions. An agent cannot determine when this tool is the right choice.

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