User Event Breakdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns per-event counts and accepts two ID types, which goes beyond annotations. It doesn't mention pagination, but annotations handle safety.

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 sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with main purpose. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explains what is returned (per-event counts). It covers the key behavior. Could mention date range applicability, but overall sufficient for a read-only analytic tool.

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%, so baseline 3. The description adds meaningful context for userId (dual ID acceptance) and gives examples of event names, adding value beyond the schema.

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 it gets an event count breakdown for a specific user, with specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_user (general info) and get_user_session_count (session count).

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 description mentions it accepts either Rybbit user_id or identified_user_id and is useful for analyzing per-user behavior. It provides clear context but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, though siblings make it implicit.

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