reports_usage_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only repeats the date format and the 'all' default from the schema. It does not disclose what the report contains, whether it is read-only, or any other behavioral traits such as data scope or required permissions.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and format. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

This is a report tool with no output schema and no annotations. The description does not explain what the report returns, how it is structured, or any limitations on the date range. For a data-report tool, this is incomplete context for the agent.

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 covers the date parameter (format) but not userKey. The description adds meaning by explaining the special value 'all' for userKey, which is not in the schema. However, it does not clarify what a specific userKey value represents (e.g., user ID, email), so it only partially compensates for the 50% 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get a user usage report for a date (YYYY-MM-DD).' It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('user usage report'), and the sibling tool reports_usage_customer implies a distinction at the user vs. customer level, even though that distinction is not explicitly named.

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?

No guidance is given on when to choose this tool over alternatives. The only usage instruction is 'Use 'all' for all users,' which addresses the userKey parameter but does not explain when to use this tool vs. reports_usage_customer or other reports.

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