report_daily

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation, whether it mutates data, or what side effects (if any) occur. The description only states the output content, not the operation's behavior or safety profile.

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 short sentence that front-loads the essential purpose and output contents. It is concise and to the point, with no wasted words, earning high marks for structure.

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?

While the output schema covers the return format, the description lacks crucial context for the 'day' parameter and does not provide usage guidance or alternative comparisons. For a simple one-parameter tool, the absence of parameter semantics and usage context makes the description incomplete for correct invocation.

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 has one parameter 'day' with 0% coverage, and the description does not explain its meaning or effect. Although the description mentions '当日' (current day), it does not clarify how the 'day' parameter interacts with this default, leaving the parameter ambiguous. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 generates a daily report with specific content: completed items categorized by work/study and total work minutes. The verb '生成' (generate) and resource '日报' (daily report) are specific, and the scope distinguishes it from the sibling tool report_weekly.

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 daily reporting use through '当日' (current day), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like report_weekly or time_list. There are no clear exclusions or alternative comparisons, leaving usage context only implied.

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