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

Annotations already establish this as a safe, idempotent, read-only operation, so the bar is lower. The description still adds behavior beyond them: the allowance is scoped to the current month and the per-scrape cap is a plan-level constraint. It omits the precise response shape, but for a no-parameter read this is substantive added context.

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?

Two short sentences, both front-loaded with the payoff. Every clause earns its place: the first defines the returned data, the second drives the correct downstream 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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description must convey what comes back, and it does explain the two headline values. It leaves minor gaps such as plan identity or scrape counts that might also be in the response, but nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 by rule. The mention of max_rows_this_scrape is a return field rather than an input, which is correctly framed as something to read rather than something to pass, so nothing is misleading.

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 names the concrete resource and the exact data returned: remaining monthly lead allowance and the per-scrape row maximum. No sibling (cancel/get/list/search/start scrape) overlaps with plan-usage reporting, so the agent can identify it uniquely. It stops short of a crisp leading verb like "Get usage," which keeps it from a perfect 5.

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?

It gives explicit action-oriented guidance: read max_rows_this_scrape before choosing a total_limit. That tells the agent to call this as a pre-flight check before mapsdata_start_scrape, which is real when-to-use context. It does not name the sibling tools directly, so it falls just short of full routing guidance.

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