get_pvr_quota

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has side effects. The error code list gives no behavioral insight beyond potential failures.

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 a raw list of error codes, which is neither concise nor structured for an agent to quickly grasp purpose. It wastes space on details that belong in the output schema, leaving the core function unstated.

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?

Even with an output schema present, the description is wholly incomplete. It does not explain the tool's function, when to use it, or what the output represents. The agent cannot determine if this tool is relevant to a query.

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 no parameters (100% coverage baseline 3), but the description adds minimal value by listing error codes that may relate to output conditions. It does not explain what the tool returns or the meaning of 'quota', so it falls short of the baseline.

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 fails to state what the tool does. It only lists error codes, leaving the purpose (getting PVR quota) implicit and unclear. No distinction from sibling tools like get_pvr_config or get_pvr_finished.

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 such as get_pvr_config or put_pvr_quota. The description provides no context for appropriate invocation.

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