get_churn_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states what the tool returns (MRR lost, churn rate). It does not disclose behavioral traits such as data recency, authentication needs, rate limits, or any side effects. For a read tool, this is minimal.

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 sentence with 13 words, front-loading the action and result. Every word is informative, with no redundancy.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and output. It could be enhanced by noting the time period is fixed to 'this month' or clarifying if data is real-time, but it is largely complete.

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?

There are no parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds meaning by specifying the exact metrics returned (MRR lost, churn rate) beyond the empty schema, which is sufficient.

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 churn metrics, specifically MRR lost this month and churn rate. The verb 'Get' and resource 'churn metrics' are unambiguous, and the detail distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_revenue_summary or get_product_breakdown.

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 implies usage for churn analysis but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_revenue_summary or get_mrr_by_platform. No exclusions or preferences are mentioned.

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