get_download_estimates

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'Fetch' without mentioning read-only nature, output format, pagination, rate limits, or any constraints. This is a minimal disclosure that fails to inform the agent about important call-time behaviors.

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, clear sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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?

For a tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return structure, data granularity options, or how to specify multiple apps/countries. The presence of many sibling tools further demands more context to avoid mis-selection.

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 provides descriptions for most parameters (71% coverage), so the description does not need to compensate heavily. However, the description adds little value beyond the schema, merely echoing 'country and date' without elaborating on parameters like data_model or date_granularity. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema coverage.

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 fetches download estimates, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_revenue_estimates or get_usage_active_users. It also specifies the scope (apps, country, date), making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool over its siblings (e.g., when download estimates are needed vs. revenue or usage). It also lacks any exclusions or alternative tool references, leaving usage context entirely implicit.

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