get_organization_pooled_usage

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the HTTP method (POST) and operation type (query only), implying no destructive side effects. It also notes the required permissions. However, it does not mention rate limits, idempotency, or other behavioral traits beyond what the schema and endpoint hint provide.

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 three sentences long, starts with the action and endpoint, and every sentence provides useful information without redundancy or waste.

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 has one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, how to call it, and required permissions. It could briefly define 'pooled usage' but is otherwise complete for its simplicity.

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 description coverage is 0% and the only parameter is documented in the description with a format hint ('Public org id (org_...)'), adding meaningful guidance beyond the schema's string type.

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 specifies 'Get org pooled usage' with the HTTP method and endpoint, clearly indicating the action and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools such as get_organization_daily_usage_data and get_organization_spending_data by focusing on pooled usage.

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 states required permissions ('Organization API key with usage:* or admin:*') and that it is query-only, providing clear context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternative tools.

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