get_usage

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral safety burden. 'Show' clearly signals a read-only, non-destructive operation, but the description does not disclose any additional behavioral details such as authentication requirements, data freshness, or rate limits. For a simple getter, this is acceptable but not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the verb and the resource with no wasted words. It is concise without sacrificing clarity.

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 parameterless read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the main return values at a useful level. The only notable ambiguity is 'recent' usage, which does not specify a time window, but the low complexity and clear scope keep the tool interpretable.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter-semantics gap. The description adds no parameter detail, and none is needed. This matches the baseline for parameterless tools.

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 uses a clear verb ('Show') and a specific resource ('account's remaining credit balance and recent sandbox usage'). It unambiguously identifies what the tool does and is easily distinguishable from all sibling sandbox-operation 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?

There is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives, but the description provides clear context: this is the account-level billing/usage query tool. Since all siblings are sandbox lifecycle/action tools, no alternative tool competes for this purpose.

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