remnawave_bandwidth_stats_get_user_usage

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

The only behavioral hint is '(read)', which is helpful but insufficient. Without annotations, the description should disclose more, such as whether the tool requires authentication, returns aggregated or raw data, or has side effects. It does not.

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 short, but this is under-specification, not conciseness. It fails to provide essential information and thus does not earn its place.

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 complexity (4 parameters, nested payload object, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain what the tool returns, how to set parameters, or how it differs from siblings. It leaves the agent with almost no usable 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist. The description adds no explanation for 'payload', 'confirmToken', 'responseMode', or 'mutationApproved'. The agent has no guidance on how to construct the payload or what the responseMode enum values mean.

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 is essentially a tautology: 'Remnawave bandwidth_stats.get_user_usage (read).' It states the tool's name and hints at a read operation but does not specify what data is retrieved (e.g., bandwidth usage for a specific user) or differentiate from similar siblings like get_node_users_usage.

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 tool versus sibling tools like remnawave_bandwidth_stats_get_node_users_usage or legacy variants. There is no context about prerequisites, filters, or scenarios.

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