umbrella_api_usage_responses

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states that it is a 'detailed' log over a date range, but does not mention pagination, sorting, field names, response format, or any limitations. This is insufficient for an un-annotated tool.

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 concise sentence with no redundant words. It is efficient and front-loaded with the core resource type and scope, though it could arguably provide more detail without sacrificing brevity.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description gives minimal information about what the response log contains, whether results are paginated, or how it differs from similar API usage logs. An agent is left without enough context to know what to expect or how to choose this over siblings.

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 already fully describes both parameters (from and to) with format details (YYYY-MM-DD). The description's 'over a date range' adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it remains at the baseline for high 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 states a specific resource, 'Detailed API response log', and the scope 'over a date range', making it clear that this tool returns a log of API responses. This distinguishes it from request logs and summary tools, though it does not explicitly name any sibling.

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 like umbrella_api_usage_requests or umbrella_api_usage_summary. No context, exclusions, or selection criteria are given, leaving the agent to infer usage. With several closely related sibling tools, this is a notable gap.

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