usage_me_endpoints

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should compensate. It indicates the tool returns data (requests and credits) but does not disclose read-only behavior, potential rate limits, or whether results are limited. The description is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core purpose is stated first, and every word adds value.

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 tool with no output schema and 4 parameters, the description covers the main output (per-endpoint request/credit totals) and ordering. However, it does not clarify behavior for optional parameters like from/to (only when range=custom) or the meaning of zero results. Still, it is largely 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with each parameter described. The description adds context that the time range is UTC and defaults to the current billing period, which reinforces but does not significantly extend the schema descriptions. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves endpoint usage breakdown for the current user, specifying per-endpoint request and credit totals. It distinguishes from siblings like usage_me_overview (overview) and usage_me_timeseries (time series data).

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 description implies use when a per-endpoint breakdown is needed and mentions filtering by UTC time range, but it does not explicitly state when to avoid it or compare with sibling tools like usage_me_overview or usage_me_timeseries.

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