github_actions_get_workflow_run_usage

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states 'Get workflow run usage', which implies a read operation but does not disclose additional traits: auth requirements, rate limits, error handling, or whether it mutates state. Contradicts annotations: false.

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?

Extremely concise at 4 words, but this is under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. Every sentence should earn its place; here, the single sentence fails to provide necessary detail, making it insufficient.

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 tool is a simple getter, but with no output schema and a sparse description, the agent has no information about the response structure or what 'usage' data is returned. The description is incomplete for effective invocation.

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 description coverage is 100% (all parameters have descriptions), but those descriptions are merely the parameter names (e.g., 'owner', 'repo', 'run_id'). The tool description adds no extra meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get workflow run usage' states the verb and resource, but 'usage' is vague—it could refer to billing, runtime, or resource consumption. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_workflow_run' by specifying 'usage', but lacks clarity on what aspects of usage are returned.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_workflow_run' or 'get_workflow_usage'. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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