downloads_by_sources

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool returns download data, but does not describe pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, data granularity, or any side effects. The mention of 'sources' is more about output dimensions than behavioral traits.

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 9-word sentence that is front-loaded and information-dense. It wastes no words and is easy to parse quickly.

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 tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the returned data looks like, how sources relate to the input parameters, or any usage context. A richer description with examples or caveats would be needed for complete guidance.

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 schema already covers 83% of parameters with descriptions and enums, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the concept of source breakdown (organic, paid, browser), which is not present in the schema, but it does not clarify the semantics of the existing parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 gets app downloads grouped by source (organic, paid, browser), which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_download_estimates by explicitly naming the source dimension.

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 description does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or selection criteria relative to sibling tools, leaving the agent to guess based on the name alone.

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