get_goals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly identifies the need for a permission but does not disclose other behavioral traits like whether the tool is read-only (implied but not stated), rate limits, or error handling. It is adequate but lacks depth.

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 concise with two sentences that front-load the main purpose. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 5 parameters (1 required) and no output schema or annotations, the description is minimal. It covers the core functionality and permission, but lacks details about the return format, pagination, or error cases. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It does not explain parameter relationships or provide usage examples.

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 retrieves 'Conversions per goal for a site.' This is a specific verb ('get') and resource ('goals'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_summary or get_timeseries. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other similar tools like get_funnels or get_revenue.

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 mentions a permission requirement ('Requires a key with the stats:read permission') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios where get_goals is preferable to get_breakdown or get_timeseries.

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