get_x_posting_quota

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by enumerating the returned fields in the absence of an output schema, but says nothing about quota reset timing, units, or whether 'managed' quota derives from the addon.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; the resource is stated before the field enumeration. Slightly dense as a single list, but every element earns its place.

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 one-optional-param read tool this is largely sufficient, and the return-field enumeration compensates for the missing output schema. However, undefined terms ('managed', 'URL-blocking status') and the absence of reset cadence leave an agent guessing about what the values mean.

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% and the single optional workspace_id is fully documented, including its default to the caller's personal workspace. The description's 'for a workspace' adds no syntax or behavior beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get') and a well-scoped resource ('managed X posting quota for a workspace'), then enumerates the returned components (monthly allowance, used, remaining, URL-blocking status). An agent can distinguish it from get_credits or get_subscription by the X-posting-specific scope, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus checking plan limits via get_subscription or adjusting quota via manage_x_posting_addon. The description also omits any precondition such as resolving workspace_id from whoami first.

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