acr_show_quotas

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

No annotations are present. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, what specific quotas are shown (e.g., storage, replication), or any prerequisites. It only states the purpose and arguments.

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 short but includes an args list that is not particularly informative. It is structured in a straightforward manner without wasted words, but the args section could be more concise by omitting it or integrating it into the main sentence.

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?

Although an output schema exists (minimizing need to describe return values), the description does not explain what kind of quota information is included (e.g., storage, webhooks, replication). Given the low complexity, more context is expected.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description only repeats the parameter names with generic labels (e.g., 'Resource group name', 'Name of the container registry'). No additional constraints, formats, or lookup hints are provided beyond the schema.

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 'Show quota information for a container registry', specifying the verb 'show' and the resource 'quota information'. It distinguishes well from sibling tools like acr_show_registry and acr_show_usage.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as acr_show_registry or acr_show_usage. The description lacks context for choosing between quota-related tools.

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