get_platform_breakdown

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses the output metrics (earnings share, traffic share, RPM, CTR) but does not explicitly state that it is read-only, mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether results are aggregated over time. The 'Get' verb implies read-only, but this is not confirmed.

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 long, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no filler. Every phrase adds value: the action, the platform categories, and the key metrics returned.

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 description sufficiently explains what the tool returns for a reporting tool with a well-documented schema. It lacks usage alternatives and does not mention output format (no output schema exists), but it covers the essential purpose and metrics. The absence of an output schema makes the metric list valuable, though not exhaustive.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions for date_range and start/end dates. The tool description adds no additional parameter context (e.g., the meaning of custom date ranges), but with full schema coverage the baseline of 3 applies.

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 specifies a clear action ('Get earnings split by platform') and states the scope ('mobile vs desktop vs tablet'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_country_breakdown or get_earnings_by_ad_format. The resource and breakdown type are explicit.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_earnings_summary or compare_date_ranges. It does not mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond the schema's required date_range, so the agent lacks context for tool selection.

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