Top Spending Resources

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds the prerequisite about GCP billing export, which is critical behavioral context. It does not contradict annotations.

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 concise sentences: one states purpose, the other adds an important prerequisite. No unnecessary words or repetition. Excellent front-loading of intent.

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?

Given no output schema, the description could mention the sorting order or output format, but the purpose is sufficiently clear for a simple query tool. The GCP prerequisite adds useful context.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions. The description adds value by noting the GCP requirement for the provider parameter, which is not in the schema. This goes beyond the baseline for high 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 action ('Find the N most expensive individual resources'), the resource type (individual resources), and the scope (over a time period). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like check_budgets or find_idle_resources by focusing on top spending.

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 for finding top spending resources but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions a GCP prerequisite but lacks direct comparisons to siblings like get_cost_summary.

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