get_usage_limits

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears transparency. It clarifies that the tool returns remaining quotas per feature based on subscription tier, making the behavior clear. However, it doesn't mention potential side effects or rate limits, but for a read-only query this is acceptable.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the tool's purpose efficiently without extraneous words.

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?

The description sufficiently explains what the tool returns (remaining quota per feature based on tier). Since there is no output schema, this covers the essential information for a simple retrieval 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?

The input schema is empty (0 parameters), so schema description coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter info since none exist.

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 'remaining quota for each feature based on your subscription tier,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like get_subscription_status and get_usage_stats by focusing on limits.

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 versus alternatives. The usage context (checking quotas) is implied by the description, but no when-not-to or alternative comparisons are provided.

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