Credit balance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuine behavioral fact not in the annotations ('Free' — no credit consumption) and says both balance and key limits are returned, but says nothing about auth requirements or failure modes.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and payload, and the trailing 'Free.' is a compact high-value signal about cost. Nothing is padded.

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 an output schema present, return-value details are legitimately omitted, and a zero-param read tool needs little else. The only minor gap is that no prerequisite (e.g., key validity) or error condition is mentioned.

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 there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. No parameter syntax or semantics are needed or missing.

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 (Show) plus the exact resource returned: remaining AI Video Check credits and key limits. It is unmistakably not a content-checking tool, cleanly separating it from the check_video/get_check/check_file siblings.

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 word 'Free' implies the agent can call this without spending credits, which is useful context, but there is no explicit when-to-use framing or note on prerequisites. Since no sibling offers an overlapping capability, the implicit guidance is adequate but thin.

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