Get Hedra API Usage

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

Annotations already cover read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds a valuable behavioral warning that the return shape depends on Hedra's current report format, alerting the agent not to assume a fixed schema. This goes beyond annotations and is useful for handling the response.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action, followed by a return note and practical examples. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 zero-parameter read tool with strong annotations, the description covers purpose, output variability, and selection guidance. It compensates for the missing output schema by warning about format instability. A minor gap is not enumerating the breakdown fields, but overall it is complete enough.

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 tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100% and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters; it instead provides output context, which 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 clearly states it retrieves 'API wallet usage/spend history and breakdown,' which is specific and distinguishes it from hedra_get_balance (current balance) and hedra_estimate_cost (cost estimation). The use-case example further reinforces the purpose.

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?

Explicitly provides a 'use when' example (monthly spend query) and a 'don't use when' case (current balance) with a named alternative (hedra_get_balance), making selection criteria unambiguous.

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