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

No annotations provided, but description fully discloses behavior: tokens fund all AI features, lists them, clarifies historical endpoint naming, and implies read-only access. No destructive behavior mentioned.

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?

Six sentences, each adding value: core purpose, scope details, shared nature, historical context, warning about confusion, and alternative endpoint. No waste.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is sufficient for agent selection and invocation. Explains token usage, related endpoints, and potential confusion with credits.

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?

Input schema has no parameters (0 params, baseline 4). Description adds meaning by explaining what tokens are used for across features, providing context beyond schema.

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 'Get the current user's available AI tokens' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by noting it is not for guide-creation credits and directing to a combined view.

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: 'Do NOT confuse with guide-creation credits (see /api/v1/credits). For a combined view (credits + tokens) prefer /api/v1/credits.' Also explains the historical naming reason.

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