get_credits

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves balance and usage information, implying a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly confirm safety, authentication requirements, or what 'usage information' includes. The verb 'Get' gives some hint, but more explicit transparency would be better.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It contains no extraneous words and communicates the essential purpose efficiently.

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 (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides adequate context: it tells what data is returned. It could be slightly more specific about the nature of 'usage information' (e.g., time period, units), but for a simple balance getter, this is sufficient.

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 the input schema is fully covered vacuously. The description adds context about what the result pertains to (credit balance and usage), but there are no parameter meanings to clarify. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource: your current credit balance and usage information. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_profile or get_salary, which target different resources.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when you need to check your current credit balance or usage. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, the context is unambiguous for a simple getter tool.

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