Argus

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

No annotations provided, yet description fails to disclose behavioral traits like read-only safety, rate limits, caching behavior, or authentication requirements. Only implies read operation via 'Get'.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded, no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 zero parameters and output schema present, the description covers the basic intent but lacks domain context (what 'providers' refers to) and behavioral details expected when no annotations exist.

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?

Zero parameters present, meeting the baseline expectation. Schema coverage is trivially 100% for empty schema.

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?

States clear action (Get) and resource (budget status) with scope (all providers). Sufficiently distinguishes from siblings like search_health or test_provider by focusing on financial/resource budgets.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., when to use search_web vs this), no prerequisites, and no conditions for use.

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