Retrieve Speechmatics API usage statistics for the current month to monitor transcriptions and manage quota.
Get Speechmatics API usage statistics for the current month
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "get_usage"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('get') but does not disclose any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or response format. For a read-only operation, this is a notably thin description that leaves the agent guessing about what will actually happen.
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 conveys all essential information. There is no wasted text, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.
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 that there are no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. However, it lacks detail about what the usage statistics contain or how they are returned. This is a simple tool, but the agent might need to know if it receives a summary count, breakdown, or raw data. The description is adequate for basic understanding but not fully 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, making parameter semantics a non-issue. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description appropriately adds no irrelevant 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 clearly states the tool's function: retrieving Speechmatics API usage statistics for the current month. The verb 'Get' is specific, the resource is 'API usage statistics', and the scope 'current month' adds precision. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on transcription and transcript retrieval.
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 usage context is implied by the description: this tool is for checking usage statistics, not for transcription tasks. While it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, the distinction from sibling tools is evident from the resource focus. A clear when-to-use scenario is provided by specifying 'current month'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.