admin_usage

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'resource usage,' with no mention of whether this is a live snapshot, a cached total, or what side effects or permissions are involved. It does not contradict any annotation, but it provides very little 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?

The description is extremely concise and front-loaded, using only four words to convey the essential subject and scope. There is no repetition, filler, or unnecessary detail.

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 parameters and an output schema present, the description is minimally viable for a simple read-only usage lookup. However, it leaves ambiguity around what 'resource usage' means and how this relates to similar usage tools, so an agent may still be uncertain about the exact data it will receive.

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 there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter clarification is needed.

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 identifies the resource: the current admin's resource usage, which distinguishes it from user- or reseller-level usage tools in the sibling list. However, it is a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb+resource statement, and it does not spell out which resource metrics are included.

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 is provided about when to choose this tool over similar siblings such as users_get_usage, resellers_get_usage, session_user_usage, or system_resource_usage_latest. The phrase 'current admin' implies a narrow scope, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instruction.

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