get_resource_usage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. 'Get current resource usage' indicates a read-only retrieval, which is transparent enough for a simple monitoring tool. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, response size, or whether data is real-time vs. cached, so some behavioral context is missing.

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 leads with the verb and object. Every word adds value—'current' specifies temporal scope, and the parenthetical enumerates exact metrics. No filler or 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?

Given the tool's low complexity, zero parameters, and lack of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context by listing the metrics returned. It could be improved by explaining what 'entry processes' means or how the response is structured, but for a monitoring snapshot, the current level of detail is nearly complete.

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 has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty, so the description has no parameter semantics to clarify. With no parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on what is being retrieved rather than on parameter details.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'current resource usage' and explicitly lists included metrics (CPU, memory, I/O, entry processes). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_bandwidth_usage or get_disk_usage, which target different resource categories.

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 context by naming the resource categories, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives. For example, it does not mention that get_bandwidth_usage should be used for network traffic or that get_disk_usage covers storage. Thus, usage guidance is only implied, not explicit.

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