get_space_saved

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals that results are bucketed over time and filterable, and the 'Get' wording implies a read-only stats operation, but it does not explicitly state the operation is non-mutating, mention auth requirements, or describe pagination/output behavior.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The main purpose, bucketing behavior, endpoint, and filtering use case are all front-loaded and concise. Every clause adds useful information, and the endpoint path is included for precise invocation.

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 stats tool with zero required parameters and a fully documented schema, the description provides enough context to invoke the tool meaningfully. The lack of an output schema means return-structure details are not covered, but the description's 'space saved over time, bucketed' gives reasonable expectation of the result shape.

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?

All five parameters have schema-level descriptions with 100% coverage, so the schema already documents the filter semantics. The description adds interpretive value by connecting filters to the goal of determining which component actually saves storage, but it does not add syntax or format details beyond the 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?

The description names a specific resource — 'space saved by transcoding' — and a specific action ('Get'), while adding the temporal 'bucketed' aspect. It is clearly distinct from sibling stats tools like get_pie_stats or get_resource_stats because of the explicit 'space saved by transcoding' target.

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?

The description gives clear context for when to use the tool: to see which library, node, worker type, or plugin actually saves storage. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the filtering guidance effectively communicates the intended use case.

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