Get organization usage summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well. It discloses the GET endpoint, required authentication, the time range/bucketing behavior, and that a clearly-labeled fixture with the real response schema is returned when no admin key is present.

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?

Two dense sentences deliver the semantic core first, then the endpoint, auth requirement, and fallback behavior. Every clause provides useful information with no filler or redundancy.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is effectively complete: it names the resource, scope, grouping, endpoint, auth path, and abnormal return behavior. It gives an agent enough to call and interpret the result correctly.

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 and an empty schema with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds contextual value about time window and grouping, but no parameter-level semantics are needed or missing.

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 states a specific verb and resource: get organization token usage for the last 7 days, daily buckets grouped by model. It names the exact API endpoint and is clearly distinct from sibling tools like get_limit_status and request_api_key.

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?

It explicitly communicates the prerequisite (Admin API key in ANTHROPIC_ADMIN_KEY) and describes fallback behavior without one. It does not name alternatives or explicitly say when not to use it, but the tool's scope and sibling names make selection straightforward.

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