agency-hosting_listOrderResourceUsageMetricsV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses data staleness (up to one hour) and exclusions (suspended/deleted websites), which are important behavioral characteristics. This provides useful context about data freshness and completeness, exceeding typical descriptions.

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 a single, well-structured paragraph that efficiently conveys core content, exclusions, staleness, and a pointer to another endpoint. It is informative without being verbose or repetitive, earning a high score for conciseness.

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 description provides a comprehensive overview of what the tool returns, including specifics about data freshness and exclusions, and mentions the related disk usage endpoint for context. Given the lack of an output schema, this is sufficient for understanding the tool's purpose and limitations.

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?

Both parameters in the schema have clear descriptions (order_id and time_frame_hours with bucket size explanation). The description adds no extra semantic detail beyond the schema, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3. No additional insight is provided.

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 clearly states the tool returns aggregated CPU, memory, and process usage for an Agency Plan order, along with plan quotas and per-website breakdown, which precisely conveys its purpose. It uses specific verbs and nouns, and the mention of disk/inode usage being on a different endpoint distinguishes it from related 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?

The description implies usage for resource metrics (CPU/memory/process) and explicitly excludes disk/inode usage, pointing to another endpoint. This provides a clear context and a when-not condition, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternative tools or when to prefer this one over others.

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