deepseek_usage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. It clearly states the tool has no external side effect ('Makes no DeepSeek API call and costs nothing') and describes the kind of data returned. This is solid behavioral transparency for a read-only reporting tool, though it does not cover error cases or exact output details.

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 sentence conveys the tool's purpose, scope options, and the important no-cost/no-call behavior. Every clause earns its place, and there is no redundant filler.

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?

The tool is simple, has one well-documented optional parameter, and has an output schema for return value details. The description tells the agent when to use it and what it covers, so nothing essential is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the single scope parameter. The description adds some context by mentioning 'last run or process-wide totals', which maps to the scope options, but does not materially improve on the schema's own explanation.

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 the specific verb 'Report' and names the exact resource: DeepSeek worker usage statistics, budgets, and pricing. It also clarifies that the tool makes no API call, which sharply distinguishes it from the sibling tools deepseek_task and deepseek_review.

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?

The description clearly implies this tool is for inspecting usage and budget information rather than performing DeepSeek tasks or reviews, especially by noting it costs nothing and makes no API call. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context is strong enough for an agent to choose it appropriately.

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