get_my_usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint; the description adds the key requirement and clarifies it reflects the subscriber's billing tier, providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two succinct sentences: first lists all returned fields, second adds read-only nature and key requirement. No filler, front-loaded with the most critical information.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the output content and authentication requirement; however, it could mention that the data is per subscriber or clarify any time-bound aspects, though not strictly necessary.

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?

Input schema has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so the description naturally adds no parameter info; baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description is not expected to elaborate further.

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 explicitly lists the specific usage metrics returned (total metered calls, included quota, overage calls, overage cost, projected month-end overage cost), clearly distinguishing it from other get_* tools by focusing on billing and subscription usage.

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?

It states the tool is read-only and requires ALGOCHAINS_SUBSCRIBER_KEY, implying access control; however, it does not explicitly contrast with tools like get_pricing or get_subscriber_status, leaving room for slightly clearer guidance on when to use this specific tool.

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