deepseek_usage

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description is consistent with that, adding that the data is local (本机) and covers billed call counts, estimated cost, and an anti-overcharge cap. This adds useful context beyond the annotations about what the tool surfaces, though it does not describe the time window or freshness of the statistics.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence listing exactly the three returned data categories, with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations covering return values, the description must explain what comes back, and it does — call count, estimated cost, and cap. Combined with readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, this is nearly complete, with only the reporting period left unspecified.

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 takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no input is needed to retrieve the usage summary.

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 names a specific verb (查看/view) and a specific resource (本机 DeepSeek 计费调用次数、估算花费、防误扣上限), making the tool's output concretely identifiable. It is clearly distinct from the deepseek_search and deepseek_fetch siblings, which perform actions whereas this reports billing state, though it does not explicitly name them.

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?

Usage is implied by the nature of the tool — you call it to inspect local DeepSeek billing/usage — but there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus the search/fetch siblings, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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