remnawave_bandwidth_stats_get_node_user_usage_legacy

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

The description labels the tool as '(read)', implying it is non-destructive, but no annotations exist. It lacks details on required permissions, rate limits, or any side effects.

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 very short but under-specified; it prioritizes brevity over usefulness.

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 tool with 4 parameters (including a nested object), no output schema, and many siblings, the description fails to provide essential context. It omits return value, parameter usage, and selection criteria.

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% schema description coverage, the description adds no meaning to the input parameters. It does not explain payload, confirmToken, responseMode, or mutationApproved.

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 merely restates the tool name and adds '(read)'. It does not specify what the tool retrieves (e.g., bandwidth usage for a node and user) or differentiate it from similar sibling tools.

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 provided on when to use this legacy tool versus other bandwidth stats tools like get_node_users_usage or get_user_usage_legacy.

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