get_consumption_report

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions the report is aggregated and includes a comparison, but does not state that it is read-only, does not describe data freshness, authentication needs, or any side effects.

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 concise with two lines of text and inline parameter explanations. It avoids redundancy but could be better structured by separating parameter docs from the main description.

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?

An output schema is present, so return values are not needed. However, the description lacks context on what 'aggregiert' means exactly, does not cover all parameters, and does not differentiate from sibling tools. Adequate but with gaps.

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 explains two out of three parameters (period and offset) with their possible values and meanings, adding value beyond the schema. However, the 'home_id' parameter is left unexplained, and with 0% schema description coverage, more complete parameter documentation is 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns an aggregated consumption/cost report with comparison to the previous period, specifying the resource and action. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_consumption', which likely returns raw consumption data.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_consumption' or others. The description only explains parameter values but lacks context on use cases.

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