get_usage_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It adds the authentication requirement and the rollup nature, but does not explicitly state whether it's a read-only operation, describe side effects, or detail response behavior beyond 'KPIs, daily series, and top endpoints.' This is adequate but not rich.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every clause adds value. The metaphor 'how is my fleet doing' is efficient and memorable, and the auth requirement is a useful inclusion.

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 simple analytics rollup with no output schema, the description conveys the main content (KPIs, series, endpoints) and the required auth context. It could mention the optional agent_id filtering more explicitly, but given the schema covers that, the description is reasonably complete.

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 schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, so the description adds little beyond the baseline. It mentions 'time window' and agent scoping implicitly, but no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 this is a spend/usage analytics rollup returning KPIs, daily series, and top endpoints — a specific verb and resource. It implies a high-level 'one-call view' but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like get_activity, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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 gives clear context for when to use it ('how is my fleet doing' one-call view) and notes a prerequisite (developer key). It does not explicitly exclude scenarios or name alternative tools, but the usage context is sufficiently clear.

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