blacksmith_vcpu_timeseries

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes 'Large payload' and 'windowed', which are helpful, but does not explain whether the operation is read-only, costs quota, requires specific permissions, or how the response is structured. The lack of annotations and minimal behavioral detail is a significant gap for a potentially heavy data retrieval.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and a critical warning. Every word adds value, with no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description must convey what the agent will receive. It only warns about large payload but does not describe the time series format, granularity, or aggregation. The tool has 3 parameters and no return structure documentation, making the description insufficient for a complete understanding of the tool's behavior and output.

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 67% (org and month have descriptions, window_size does not). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, and 'windowed' is too vague to clarify the window_size parameter. Since coverage is below 80%, the description should compensate but does not, leaving the window_size parameter semantically underdefined.

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 the resource (vCPU/job usage) and the time scope (a month, windowed), implying retrieval of a time series. While no explicit verb like 'get' or 'list' is used, the phrase 'usage time series' clearly indicates the operation. It does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like blacksmith_current_vcpu or blacksmith_monthly_usage, but the 'windowed' and 'month' qualifiers provide some differentiation.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The 'Large payload' warning is a cautionary note but not a usage guideline. It does not mention alternatives like blacksmith_current_vcpu for current usage or blacksmith_monthly_usage for aggregate monthly data, so the agent is left without direction on tool selection.

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