get_structured_analytics

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or whether it has any side effects. While 'get' implies reading, the description should disclose behavioral traits more clearly, especially since annotations are absent.

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 relatively short and front-loaded with the key purpose. It could be slightly more structured by separating the requirement mention, but overall it is efficient and avoids unnecessary words.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description lists some return values but not in a structured way. It lacks details on how structured outputs are formatted or what exact fields are included, leaving some ambiguity for agent invocation.

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%, so parameters are already well-documented in the schema. The description adds context about what the parameters relate to (e.g., 'conversaciones recientes' for limit), but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 it obtains detailed analytics using structured outputs, listing specific components like KPIs, intention distribution, sentiment, etc. The name is self-explanatory, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_analytics or get_conversation_analytics.

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 that structured outputs must be activated, but gives no guidance on when to use this tool over other analytics tools. With many sibling tools offering similar functionality, this lack of differentiation is a significant gap.

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