get_daily_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data source (Beefy P&L subgraph) and the metrics returned, adding some behavioral context. However, it does not address data ordering, freshness, pagination, or explicitly confirm it is a read-only operation, which would enhance transparency.

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 two concise sentences: the first states what the tool retrieves, the second states its intended use. 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 tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the purpose, data source, included metrics, and a usage scenario. It lacks an explicit return format or sort order, but given the simplicity and the listed metrics, it is sufficiently complete for selection and basic invocation.

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 single 'days' parameter fully described ('Number of recent days to return (1-90)'). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, 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 clearly states it retrieves daily platform statistics from the Beefy P&L subgraph, listing specific metrics (volume, fees, trader counts, market activity). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_global_stats, which likely returns aggregated totals rather than daily breakdowns.

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 explicitly recommends using this tool for trend analysis and historical performance, providing clear context. However, it does not name alternatives or explicitly state when not to use it, stopping short of a full when/when-not comparison.

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