w2w_get_daily_totals

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses useful behavioral traits such as showing assigned shifts/hours and supporting automatic pagination. Yet it does not mention any side effects, authentication requirements, or what exactly constitutes 'totals', which would add more context.

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 composed of three short, purposeful sentences. It front-loads the main action and adds only informative details (return content and pagination). No filler or redundancy.

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?

For a simple tool with two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, return summary, and pagination behavior. It could be more precise about the structure of the daily totals, but it is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 already provides 100% coverage for the two parameters, including format and examples. The description only refers to 'a date range' without adding any extra meaning to the start_date and end_date parameters, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('daily schedule totals from When2Work'), and the scope ('for a date range'). It also mentions what is shown (assigned shifts and hours), but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling w2w_get_daily_position_totals.

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 provides situational guidance by noting that automatic pagination is supported for ranges over 31 days, implying the tool is suitable for long date ranges. However, it does not mention when to avoid this tool or name alternative tools.

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