get_runtime_usage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'resource consumption metrics' without disclosing what metrics are included, whether the operation is read-only, any required permissions, or if data is aggregated over time. This is a significant gap for a tool that may have different data granularity.

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 single sentence is brief and front-loaded, but it lacks necessary elaboration, making it under-specified rather than efficiently concise. It could be improved with a second sentence on what metrics are returned or how they are presented.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should explain return values, units, or time ranges, but it only provides a vague phrase. The overall tool context is simple but still incomplete for an agent to know what to expect when invoking the tool.

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 describes workspace_id but not id; the description says 'one runtime' which implies id is the runtime identifier, but adds no further meaning about formats, defaults, or relationships. With only 50% schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 indicates the tool retrieves resource consumption metrics for a single runtime, and the name 'get_runtime_usage' reinforces this. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_runtime_activity or dashboard_usage_* by focusing specifically on resource consumption for one runtime.

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?

There is no mention of when to use this tool versus alternatives like dashboard_usage_daily or get_runtime_activity. The description provides no context on typical scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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