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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds useful content-level context by enumerating the credit categories returned, but says nothing about auth requirements, scoping to workspace vs brand, or freshness of the snapshot.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the enumeration of credit types is the most informative part placed immediately after the verb. Efficient, though it could have used one more clause to route versus siblings.

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, the description does carry useful return-content detail (the credit categories), but it leaves brand_id and the query override undocumented and gives no hint about how to scope the request to a workspace. Adequate for a simple read, with clear gaps remaining.

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 67%: workspace_id is documented in the schema while brand_id has no description and query is a generic escape hatch. The description adds no parameter meaning at all, so it neither helps nor compensates for the brand_id gap; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and a precise resource (workspace AI credit balance snapshot), and enumerates what the balance comprises (plan credits, trial grants, purchased credits). It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not differentiate itself from the nearby aidelly_get_usage sibling.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as aidelly_get_usage, which an agent could plausibly confuse with a credit-balance lookup. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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