github_actions_get_workflow_usage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not indicate that the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has rate limits. The word 'get' implies a read operation, but this is implicit.

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 extremely concise (3 words), but it is under-specified. It does not provide enough value for an AI agent to understand the tool's purpose and usage.

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 the simplicity of the tool (3 params, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what 'usage' entails or what the response contains. There is no mention of output format or typical use cases.

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 has 100% coverage but parameter descriptions are just the parameter names. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. For example, 'workflow_id' is not explained in context.

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 states 'Get workflow usage' which indicates retrieving usage data for a workflow, but it's vague about what kind of usage (e.g., minutes, storage). Among sibling tools like 'get_workflow_run_usage', the purpose is not clearly differentiated.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_workflow_run_usage' or 'get_actions_cache_usage'. The description does not mention context or exclusions.

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