get_user_requests_analytics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and no destructive behavior. The description adds value by noting that the tool is Enterprise-gated and returns 403 on non-Enterprise plans, which is essential behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not detail other behavioral aspects like pagination or output format, but the presence of an output schema mitigates that need.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: first for purpose, second for usage guidelines, third for access restrictions. No fluff, front-loaded with the core action.

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 the complexity (29 parameters, required fields, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, and a key behavioral constraint (Enterprise gating). It does not describe the output schema or pagination, but the presence of an output schema and rich parameter descriptions in the schema partially compensate. Slight gap in not mentioning that time range and api_key_ids are required, but the schema 'required' field handles that.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so each parameter is already documented. The tool's description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides. Per guidelines, baseline 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is high.

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 per-user request-count time-series data grouped by user. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource, and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_users_analytics' by naming the alternative.

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 provides when to use this tool ('find heavy users and traffic concentration') and when to use the alternative ('get_users_analytics for aggregate active and new user trends'). It also warns about the Enterprise-gated restriction and 403 response, giving clear usage constraints.

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