daily_demand

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It states the output includes average, peak, and minimum MWh, likely aggregated daily. However, it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, whether it handles time zones, or what happens if data is missing for a date range. These gaps limit 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 sentences plus a parameter list, all relevant. It front-loads the purpose and usage recommendation. The parameter list is typical for Google-style docstrings but adds a bit of vertical space. No wasted sentences.

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 3 simple string parameters, an output schema exists (presumably documenting return fields), and no nested objects, the description is largely complete. It provides purpose, usage, and parameter formats. Missing details like valid region codes or date range limits are minor given the output schema's presumed coverage.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains region as a balancing authority code, start and end as inclusive dates with 'YYYY-MM-DD' format. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema property titles. However, it does not specify valid region codes or constraints on date range length.

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 returns daily demand statistics (average, peak, minimum MWh) for a region over a date range. It distinguishes itself from the sibling query_demand by explicitly recommending use for ranges longer than a few days.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool over query_demand ('for ranges longer than a few days') and lists three parameters with format hints. No exclusions or alternatives are elaborated beyond query_demand, but the recommendation is specific and actionable.

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