reports_usage_customer

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the action and scope. It does not mention what the report contains, how data is aggregated, access requirements, or any limitations beyond the date format.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the action, the target, and the required input format. No filler or redundant information is present.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, but the description lacks any detail about what the usage report includes or how it might be returned. The sibling tools and schema provide some context, but the description alone only gives a minimal, though adequate, picture.

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 the only parameter ('date' as YYYY-MM-DD and a past date), so the description adds no further semantic value. Baseline 3 is appropriate because schema coverage is 100% and the description simply echoes the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('customer-wide usage report') with a required date, clearly identifying what the tool does. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like reports_usage_user by explicitly noting the 'customer-wide' scope.

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 use for retrieving a customer-wide report for a specific date, providing clear context. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the sibling context and 'customer-wide' qualifier make the usage scenario reasonably clear.

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