report_printer_overage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: automatic subtraction of included printers, reporting to Stripe's active_printers meter at $15 each, and auto-detection of printer count when omitted. It does not cover error cases or authentication needs, but the core behavior is well explained.

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 well-organized with sections for general description, parameter details, and an example. Every sentence adds value, though the example could be slightly more concise. Overall, it is efficient and front-loaded with 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 the tool's moderate complexity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers business logic, parameter behavior, and provides an example. It lacks explicit details on return values or error handling, but the effect of the tool (reporting to Stripe) is clearly explained. The description is fairly complete for its 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 description includes an 'Args' section that explains both parameters in detail: subscription_item_id (Stripe format si_...) and active_printer_count (optional, auto-detect when empty). Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description fully compensates by adding meaningful context and usage guidance for each parameter.

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 reports metered printer usage to Stripe for Enterprise billing. It uses a specific verb (report) and resource (printer overage), and the automatic subtraction of 50 printers distinguishes it from sibling tools, none of which perform billing reporting.

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 explains the Enterprise context, that the first 50 printers are included, and how the tool automatically subtracts the included quantity. It also provides an example. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the use case is clear and no alternative tools are named, which is acceptable given the uniqueness of the tool.

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