get_api_usage

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

Annotations already mark the endpoint as read-only and open-world, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond those hints: the rate limit and the per-endpoint grouping. No contradiction exists.

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 short sentences: the first states the purpose, and the second adds a critical rate-limit caution. Every word earns its place with no 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?

For a zero-parameter read-only endpoint with an output schema, the description covers the purpose, the scope (per endpoint), and the key operational constraint. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully describes everything an agent needs. The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are necessary.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a summary of FR24 API credit usage per endpoint'). It is immediately distinguishable from all sibling tools, which focus on flight, airport, and airline data rather than API 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?

Clearly indicates when to use the tool: when the agent needs a per-endpoint summary of FR24 API credit usage. It also supplies operational guidance by warning about the 1-call-per-minute rate limit. It does not name alternatives, but no sibling tool serves the same purpose.

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