get_rate_limit_info

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the tool's output content (algorithm explanation, headers, client code). It indicates a read operation without side effects, though it does not specify whether the client is executable code or a code snippet.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and content. No unnecessary words, and the key action ('Get') is front-loaded.

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 documentation tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately lists the types of information returned. However, it does not specify the format (text, code, structured data), which would enhance 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?

The only parameter (include_client_code) is fully described in the input schema. The tool description adds minimal extra context (e.g., 'production-grade'), not significantly enhancing understanding beyond the schema. Baseline is 3 due to 100% schema coverage.

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 retrieves BigCommerce API rate limit details, including specific content like bucket algorithm, response headers, and a client implementation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that cover other aspects of the API.

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 implies the tool is used when needing rate limit information, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternative sibling tools like get_best_practices or get_code_example. No exclusions or context are provided.

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