acedatacloud_get_usage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only hints at authorization ('caller-authorized') but does not disclose potential errors, response shape, or the fact that it is read-only. The verb 'get' implies a safe read, but it is not explicitly stated.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the purpose. Zero wasted words, and it is appropriately structured for a simple lookup tool.

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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool with an output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It lacks any note on when to use this vs. list_usage or what constitutes caller authorization. It does not leverage the output schema to explain what is returned, but that is covered by the schema itself.

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 100% (the schema describes usage_id as 'API usage UUID'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it gets a baseline score of 3. No extra info like format or required context is added.

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 the action ('get') and resource ('API usage record'), and 'caller-authorized' adds a scoping detail. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like list_usage (listing multiple) and export_usage (exporting), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that a specific usage_id is required (though implied by the parameter) or that list_usage should be used for browsing without an ID. No exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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