get_api_usage

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool is free ('0 credits'), defaults to last 7 days, and describes the output structure in detail. No destructive behavior is mentioned, which is appropriate for a read-only usage tool. The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the schema.

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, highly efficient. The first sentence states purpose and output. The second covers cost, defaults, and parameter usage. Every sentence provides value without redundancy.

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 is provided, but the description fully explains the return format (records array with fields). It covers all essential aspects: purpose, cost, parameter customization, and output structure. For a simple usage tool with well-documented parameters, this is 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 descriptions for both parameters. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by specifying they are 'Unix-ms strings' and explaining default behavior (defaults to last 7 days). This helps the agent understand format and usage.

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 purpose: 'Get your CreatorDB API usage.' It specifies the output format (records with date, requestCount, etc.) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools focused on specific platform data or searches. The verb 'get' and resource 'API usage' are unambiguous.

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 provides clear context: 'Free to call (0 credits). Defaults to last 7 days; pass start/end as Unix-ms strings to widen the window.' It gives default behavior and how to modify it. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool but implies it for checking usage, not data retrieval.

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