aethis_usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, and the description adds meaningfully beyond them: tenant-scoped, requires an API key, the rolling 24h window, and the relative scarcity of `generate` vs metered-but-unlimited `read`. These are behavioral facts the agent could not infer from the annotations.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the purpose leads, followed by field detail, then the operational trigger and constraint. No sentence is filler, despite the length.

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 supplies the return shape (per-class used/limit/remaining/reset), the auth requirement, and the scoping. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description instead documents the response fields (used, limit, remaining, reset time) which is useful but not a parameter concern.

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+resource (show the caller's rate-limit budget per operation class) and enumerates the exact operation classes and fields returned. It is unmistakably distinct from siblings like aethis_generation_status or aethis_list_projects.

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?

Explicitly prescribes when to call it ('before a large authoring run') and the downstream behavior (report remaining `generate` budget to the user) so a 429 is never the first signal. That is a clear triggering condition plus rationale.

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