analytics_waros

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

With no annotations, the description needed to carry the full behavioral burden, but it only names metrics. It does not state whether the tool computes and returns data, whether it is read-only, what grouping does, or what the response looks like. 'Analitica' implies analysis but does not make the behavior explicit.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It is a fragment without a sentence structure that front-loads a callable action or key usage constraint.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, this description is too sparse to be complete. It identifies the metric areas but omits date-range behavior, grouping options, response format, and how this differs from sibling tools.

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 0%, and the description says nothing about date_from, date_to, or group_by. The enum values for group_by are visible in the schema, but the description contributes no parameter meaning or usage hints, leaving the agent to guess date formats and grouping semantics.

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 identifies a specific analytical domain (WAROS) and enumerates the report contents (issued, redeemed, rate), making its purpose reasonably clear. It lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'list', but the resource and metric set are concrete enough to distinguish it from related waros tools such as waros_balances or waros_estimate.

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 about when to choose this tool over alternative analytics/waros tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions, so the agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and the metric labels.

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