Get Daily Active Users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: the default date behavior (today UTC) and the timezone. This is sufficient for a simple read-only metric query.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Get') and immediately states the resource and optional parameter. No wasted words.

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?

For a tool with one optional parameter, clear annotations (readOnly, idempotent), and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and its default behavior. There are no significant gaps for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 the date parameter fully described as 'Date to query, ISO 8601 date-time (defaults to today UTC)'. The description merely repeats this default, adding no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 gets a daily active user count for a specific date, with a clear verb and resource. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from related siblings like get_mau or get_dau_trend, but the scope is unambiguous.

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 intended use is implied: when you need a DAU count for a given date. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives such as get_mau or get_dau_trend, and no mention of exclusions.

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