get_agent_usage

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

With no annotations, the description relies on 'Get' to imply read-only behavior, but does not detail what 'token usage' includes (e.g., breakdown by type) or any potential constraints. Adequate but minimal.

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 plus a clean argument list. Front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Extremely concise and structured well.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params) and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description is mostly complete. It could mention return format briefly, but provides sufficient context for an agent to use correctly.

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 description adds meaningful information beyond the schema: agent_id gets a format example ('bc-...'), run_id is clearly explained as optional for scoping. Compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 explicitly states 'Get token usage for an agent' with optional run scoping, using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_daily_usage_data and get_spending_data by specifying per-agent and optionally per-run scope.

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 implies usage for agent-specific token usage, but does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives or provide exclusions. Context is clear but lacks direct guidance.

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