zyta_minerva_uso

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a GET request (read-only) and user-specific data ('del usuario'), but omits authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. This leaves gaps for an AI agent.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's function and includes the endpoint. No wasted words; front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 covers key return values (cost, limit, balance). However, it lacks specifics on time frame (current month?), data types, or format. Slightly incomplete for full agent understanding.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema coverage (empty object), the description adds value by explaining the tool returns cost, plan limit, and remaining balance. Baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description meets this criteria.

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 tool displays monthly Minerva usage including accumulated cost, plan limit, and remaining balance. It uses specific verb 'muestra' and resource 'uso mensual', distinguishing it from sibling tools like zyta_minerva_buscar_fallos (search) and zyta_minerva_consultar (consult).

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 checking usage and balance but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other Minerva tools). No exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

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