Report consumption of a metered Feature (write)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well. It discloses that the call is a write operation, that the increment is added to existing quantity, that a repeated call double-counts, and that there is no absolute mode fallback; the retry hazard is explicitly called out.

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?

Every sentence carries a distinct piece of information: operation, semantic meaning, feature-type routing, idempotency warning, and billing workflow. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no filler.

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?

For a write tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers semantics, feature applicability, retry behavior, and billing integration. It does not describe response or error details, but the schema already documents parameters and the core invocation context is sufficiently complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that increment is 'not a running total' but an additive delta to what ProAbono already holds, which usefully refines the schema's own description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Adds an increment to the current quantity of a Consumption Feature of a customer,' with concrete examples (messages, API calls, gigabytes). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming the feature types it applies to.

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?

Explicitly scopes usage to Consumption Features and names the alternatives: set_feature_current_quantity for Limitation Features and set_feature_enabled for OnOff Features. It also gives workflow guidance to call quote_usage_change first when the consumption is billable.

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