bridge_cost

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

The description indicates a read-only operation (report cumulative cost) but does not detail whether the report resets, the time scope, or any potential side effects. Given no annotations, the description carries full burden but leaves some ambiguity.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately conveys the tool's purpose and output structure.

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 zero parameters and an existing output schema, the description sufficiently explains the tool's output (breakdown by thread and grand total). It could be improved by clarifying what 'API cost' means (e.g., tokens or dollars), but overall complete for a simple report.

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?

With zero parameters, the description inherently covers all parameter semantics. The baseline is 4 per guidelines, and the description does not contradict schema.

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 reports cumulative API cost of ask_codebase calls, broken down by thread and grand total. This distinguishes it from siblings like ask_codebase (which likely makes API calls) and bridge_forget (which might manage state).

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 usage for monitoring costs but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks when-not-to-use or prerequisite instructions.

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