Retrieve paginated records of a user's AI tool and product usage history.
Get the user's AI tool and product usage history.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "get_product_usage"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| limit | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; description only states 'Get', implying read-only, but fails to disclose pagination details, authentication needs, or what 'usage history' encompasses. Minimal behavioral context.
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?
Description is a single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant information. However, it could expand on parameter usage without sacrificing conciseness.
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?
With no output schema, no annotations, and undocumented parameters, the description is insufficient for an agent to understand the data shape or invocation context. Pagination and return format are missing.
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 has 2 parameters (page, limit) with 0% description coverage. The description adds no meaning or usage hints for these parameters, leaving the agent without guidance on how to use them.
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?
Description clearly states the tool retrieves usage history for AI tools and products. Verb and resource are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_profile_info' or 'get_leads'.
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. Siblings vary widely, but the description offers no context for selection or exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.