lemonade_get_day_results

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose read-only behavior and edge cases. 'Return' implies a read operation but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects. It also does not explain what happens when no day has completed, or whether the 'visible report' differs from any hidden data. The content list is helpful, but significant behavioral context is missing.

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 (17 words) that front-loads the action and resource. Every word adds meaning, including the specific report contents and time scope. There is no redundancy.

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 no schema or output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining return values. It lists the key data categories, which is good. However, it lacks context about when it is appropriate to call (e.g., after lemonade_wait_for_day_end) and does not address the no-day-completed edge case. This makes it slightly under-specified for an agent unfamiliar with the workflow.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to add beyond the schema. Per the rubric, zero params warrant a baseline of 4.

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 the specific verb 'Return' with a clear resource: 'the visible report for the most recently completed day.' It also enumerates contents (P&L, satisfaction, missed sales, displayed feedback), which distinguishes it from sibling report tools like lemonade_get_month_history or lemonade_get_business_report. This is a precise, unambiguous statement.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be called after a day completes, nor does it reference sibling tools for historical or broader reports. The phrase 'most recently completed day' implies a timing constraint but no explicit recommendation or exclusion is given.

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