get_conversation_analytics

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 does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, nor does it mention rate limits, data freshness, or any side effects. The behavior is implied to be a query but not explicitly stated.

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 very short (one line) and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity; it is concise but not fully informative.

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 the large number of sibling analytics tools, this description lacks sufficient context to distinguish itself. No output schema is provided, and the description does not specify return format or pagination. The '[query]' fragment is confusing.

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 coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only hinting at the returned distribution attributes. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states it provides analytics on conversations, specifically distribution of satisfaction, urgency, and intentions. However, it fails to differentiate from sibling analytics tools like get_analytics or get_structured_analytics. The meaning of '[query]' is unclear and not reflected in the input schema.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_analytics, get_sentiment_analysis, or get_structured_analytics. The description does not specify prerequisites or typical use cases.

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