Get Sent Multicast Message Count

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral aspects such as side effects, permissions required, error possibilities, or whether it is a read-only operation. The description simply states what it does without revealing any behavioral traits beyond the basic function.

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, concise sentence that directly states the purpose without any superfluous words or structures. It is well-organized and easy to parse, containing only the essential 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and the required input. However, it does not mention potential return values or error scenarios, which might be expected in a more complex context, but for a simple count retrieval, it is sufficient.

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 provides a clear and detailed description of the only parameter 'date' (format, example, length, timezone). The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond that, but since the schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra context about the parameter.

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 (number of multicast messages sent), and the scope (on a specified date). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_sent_push_count or get_sent_broadcast_count by explicitly mentioning multicast, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over similar tools like get_sent_push_count or get_sent_broadcast_count. The information is implicit from the tool name, but not explicitly stated.

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