Get daily energy usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds what the payload contains (energy split plus regenerated energy and distance) and a regional availability caveat, but says nothing about retention limits or granularity boundaries.

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?

Two tight sentences with the energy breakdown front-loaded and the applicability caveat last. No filler; the trailing fragment ('EVs and PHEVs in some regions') is terse but earns its place as a scope qualifier.

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?

With annotations covering safety, 100% schema coverage on two params, and an output schema that already describes return values, the description supplies everything an agent needs to select and invoke it. Only the absence of sibling contrast keeps it from a 5.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with only two parameters (days, vehicle), so the schema fully documents them. The description's 'daily' wording loosely implies the day-bucketing behavior of 'days' but adds no format or default guidance beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get daily electric energy use') and enumerates the exact breakdown returned (driving, climate, electronics, battery care, regenerated energy, distance). This is far more informative than the title, though it never names or contrasts with siblings like get_trips, which is the nearest overlapping tool.

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 explicit when-to-use statement or alternatives are named. Usage is only implied by the 'daily' framing, and the 'EVs and PHEVs in some regions' clause acts as an applicability/availability caveat rather than routing guidance.

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