printer_usage_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to state that the tool is read-only, has no side effects, or lacks authentication/rate-limit details. The pricing info adds business logic but not behavioral traits.

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 concise with three sentences. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, enterprise context, pricing. No wasted words.

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?

Despite zero parameters, the description lacks output format or structure. With no output schema, the agent is left guessing whether the data is returned as text, numbers, or structured JSON. Important for a simple retrieval tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so description baseline is 4. It adds meaning by specifying the output fields ('count, allowance, overage'), which is beyond the empty 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 uses specific verb 'Show' and resources 'printer count, included allowance, overage charges', clearly stating what the tool does. It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming unique data points, and no sibling shares the same purpose.

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 mentions 'Enterprise feature' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not list conditions or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear usage context.

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