dashboard_usage_by_agent

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

No annotations are provided, and the description discloses no behavioral traits. It does not indicate whether this is a read-only query, whether it returns aggregated metrics, or any pagination or filtering behavior. The burden falls entirely on the description, which fails to address it.

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?

At four words, the description is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It lacks structural framing or context that would help the agent understand the tool's function.

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 tool has no annotations and no output schema, the description is the only source of behavioral information. It fails to explain what 'usage' means, what data is returned, or how to interpret the output, making it completely inadequate for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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 schema description fully documents the single optional parameter workspace_id, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional semantic value about how the parameter affects the results, but it is not required given the 100% schema coverage.

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 'Usage by agent.' simply restates the tool name without specifying an action verb or clarifying what 'usage' means. It does not distinguish this from sibling tools like dashboard_usage_daily or dashboard_agent_runtime, which also relate to usage metrics.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context about the intended use case, filter scope, or relationship to other dashboard tools.

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