dashboard_usage_daily

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior, but it only names the resource. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned, whether it is aggregated, or any operational constraints—critical gaps for an agent deciding to invoke 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?

The description is a single fragment, not a structured sentence. While it is short, it is under-specified rather than concise, offering too little information to be useful for an agent.

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?

Even for a simple tool with one optional parameter, the description is incomplete. It does not clarify the time granularity ('daily'), what credits/tokens refer to, or how it relates to sibling dashboard tools, leaving significant gaps for the agent to infer.

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 fully documents the single optional workspace_id parameter with a description, so the schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since structured data already handles parameter meaning.

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 'Daily credit/token usage' is a noun phrase rather than a verb+resource construction, making it somewhat vague about whether the tool retrieves, lists, or summarizes data. It conveys the subject but does not clearly distinguish it from sibling tools like dashboard_usage_by_agent or dashboard_agent_runtime.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states a topic and offers no context about typical use cases, prerequisites, or situations to avoid, leaving the agent to guess.

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