Quota and server status

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

Adds cost semantics the annotations do not convey: the call is free unless refresh=true, which ties to readOnlyHint=false and makes the mutating exception understandable. It also explains what is returned (quota plus request/cache counters), though it does not describe the effect of clear_cache or any rate limits on the call itself.

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, zero waste, front-loaded with what is returned and then the usage triggers. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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, the description names the returned data (quota windows, request and cache counters) and the cost caveat, which is enough to call it correctly. The effect of clear_cache on the in-memory cache's callers is not elaborated, a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by implying refresh=true incurs a charge, which the schema's 'lightweight network call' wording does not state. clear_cache is left to 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?

States a specific verb (Return) and resource (remaining Nexus quota hourly/daily plus this server's request and cache counters). No sibling tool deals with quota/rate-limit status, so it is trivially distinguishable from the mod/game/upload siblings.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use triggers: before a batch of calls, or to decide whether to back off after an HTTP 429. There is no explicit when-not or named alternative, but the invocation contexts are concrete and actionable.

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