Get DAU Trend

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds only 'trend' and 'last N days', which is consistent but does not disclose return format or edge cases (e.g., timezone). It neither contradicts nor substantially extends the annotations.

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?

One concise, front-loaded sentence that immediately conveys the tool's essence. No filler or redundant information.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description is nearly complete. Annotations handle safety, the schema handles parameter constraints, and the description defines the core behavior. Minor missing detail about the response shape is acceptable given no output schema.

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 coverage is 100% with a well-described 'days' parameter (min, max, default). The description's 'N days' merely restates the parameter without adding new semantic detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 resource ('daily active users trend') with a clear temporal scope ('over the last N days'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling metrics tools like get_dau (likely single-day) and get_mau_trend (monthly trend).

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 context is clear: use this when you need a daily active users trend over a customizable number of days. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it lacks exclusions but provides sufficient implicit guidance.

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