Show storage usage
usageCompare your account's current storage usage against your quota to keep track of available space.
Instructions
Show account storage usage versus quota.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
usageCompare your account's current storage usage against your quota to keep track of available space.
Show account storage usage versus quota.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds 'versus quota' context but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits or data format. Satisfactory given annotations.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded, no waste. Every word earns its place.
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?
Description is adequate for a simple read-only tool with no parameters, but lacks detail about output format or structure. With no output schema, a bit more context would improve completeness.
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?
No parameters exist; baseline score of 4 applies. Description adds no parameter info since none are needed.
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?
Description clearly states the verb ('Show') and resource ('account storage usage versus quota'), distinguishing it from generic sibling tools 'get' and 'put'. It is specific and unambiguous.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings 'get' and 'put' are present but not mentioned; no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Regan-Milne/obsideo-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server