get_tempdb_usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining the output includes both user and internal object allocations and reports in MB, which goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand what to expect.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the purpose and key output details. It contains no filler words and every phrase adds value.

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 simple read-only diagnostic tool with complete schema descriptions, readOnly annotations, and an output schema (as indicated in context), the description is fully sufficient. It explains the tool's scope and units without needing to detail return structures, which are covered elsewhere.

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 description coverage is 100%; both parameters (limit and database_name) have clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'per-session tempdb consumption', and specifies the exact data returned ('user/internal object allocations and net usage in MB'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_tempdb_space_breakdown, which likely focuses on overall tempdb space rather than per-session metrics.

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 usage context (per-session analysis) but does not explicitly mention when to choose this over alternatives such as get_tempdb_space_breakdown or get_active_sessions. No exclusions or alternative names are given, so guidance is only implicit.

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