Multiple daily metrics at once

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, and the description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: the multi-day lag for recent metrics and that empty values near today are normal, not errors. It also discloses the response shape and that values are int64 strings, which is useful for parsing.

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 compact yet information-dense, covering purpose, relationship to sibling, response format, value types, quota benefit, and a critical data-lag caveat in just three sentences. Every sentence earns its place with no repetition or filler.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description explicitly outlines the nested response structure (multiDailyMetricTimeSeries[].dailyMetricTimeSeries[] of {dailyMetric, timeSeries.datedValues[]}), value type, and the lag behavior. This is complete for a complex batch tool, and the sibling differentiation and quota rationale cover the operational context.

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 has 100% description coverage for all four parameters, so the schema already documents their meaning and constraints. The description adds context about batching and response structure, but does not add meaning for the parameters themselves beyond what the schema provides, so it stays at the baseline.

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 returns daily time series for several performance metrics in one batched call, and explicitly differentiates it from the sibling tool get_daily_metrics by noting it returns 'same data as get_daily_metrics, but batched.' This is a specific verb+resource+scope definition with no ambiguity.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Prefer this over several get_daily_metrics calls to save quota.' It also names the alternative (get_daily_metrics) and describes the batching advantage, making the choice between sibling tools clear.

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