avanan_get_daily_usage

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

No annotations were provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it retrieves data but does not mention if it is read-only, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or error scenarios (e.g., invalid date). For a retrieval tool, this is minimal 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It directly states the purpose and the required timeframe, earning its place without redundancy.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description could hint at the return format (e.g., list of records, total usage). It is complete for a simple retrieval tool but leaves out details such as whether results are aggregated per tenant or paginated. Given the complexity of daily usage across tenants, more context could be beneficial.

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% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (year, month, day). The description adds context that the data is across all tenants, but the schema already explains each parameter. Given high schema coverage, the baseline is 3; the description does not add significant new meaning.

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 action (Get), the resource (daily usage details), and the scope (across all customer tenants). It also implies that the user must specify a year, month, and day, which are the exact parameters. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool avanan_get_monthly_usage.

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 implies usage for retrieving daily usage, and the sibling list includes avanan_get_monthly_usage for monthly data, which provides implicit differentiation. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs others, no when-not-to-use, and no mention of prerequisites or alternatives.

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