usage_timeseries

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It reveals authentication requirement (JWT), return format (buckets), and timezone (UTC). However, it omits potential rate limits, pagination, or limits on date range. Adequate but not comprehensive for a read operation.

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 concise sentences, first states purpose, second adds essential details about return type and timezone. No filler or repetition. Front-loaded effectively.

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?

No output schema, but description adequately implies return type (buckets). Covers authentication and timezone. Missing details on result limits or pagination, but overall sufficient for a simple timeseries query tool.

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 covers all 5 parameters (100% coverage). Description adds context about chart rendering and UTC, but does not explain individual parameter semantics beyond schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as description adds marginal value.

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?

Description clearly states verb ('Get'), resource ('current user's usage timeseries'), and return type ('JWT-authenticated request and credit consumption buckets for chart rendering'). It distinguishes from siblings like usage_overview and usage_endpoints by specifying timeseries 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like usage_endpoints or usage_overview. Only implicit hint 'for chart rendering' suggests a use case, but no exclusion criteria or context for selecting this over other usage tools.

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