uipath_get_consumption_license_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves data and summarizes the output ('used vs total for each license type over time') and mentions the required permission ('Requires License.View permission'). However, it does not disclose side effects, return format details, or limitations, though as a read operation, this is partially mitigated by the description's read-oriented language.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and every clause adds value: it states what is retrieved, what is shown, and a key permission requirement. No redundant or filler content exists.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should cover functionality, return behavior, and permission, which it does at a basic level. However, it lacks differentiation from closely related sibling tools (e.g., get_license_stats, get_licenses_runtime) and does not mention the optional parameters or how they influence results. This is a clear gap for an agent trying to select among similar license-related tools.

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 description coverage is 100% (both 'days' and 'tenantId' have descriptions), so baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; for example, it does not explain how 'days' affects the returned data or when 'tenantId' should be used. The schema already provides adequate parameter context.

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's function: 'Gets consumption licensing usage statistics (platform units)' and specifies what it shows ('used vs total for each license type over time'). This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_license_stats or get_licenses_runtime by mentioning 'consumption' and 'platform units.'

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 implies usage context by naming 'consumption licensing usage statistics' and mentions a required permission, which is a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as uipath_get_license_stats or uipath_get_licenses_named_user, nor does it provide exclusions or alternative tool names.

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