fattly_creditsCheck your FATTLY credit balance before generating images or videos to avoid failed requests. Read-only and free, it confirms sufficient credits for costly generations.
Shows the current credit balance on the FATTLY account. Read-only and free — call it before an expensive generation to make sure the user has enough credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces this with 'Read-only and free' and adds practical context about credit costs for generations, which goes slightly beyond the structured annotations.
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 two sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the usage guidance is compact and actionable.
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 simple zero-parameter read-only tool, the description is largely complete. It explains what the tool does, that it is safe and free, and when to call it. It does not specify the exact return format, but that is not critical for this call pattern.
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 coverage is 100%, so parameter semantics are trivially complete. Per baseline guidance for zero-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate.
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 states a specific verb ('Shows') and resource ('current credit balance on the FATTLY account'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling generation tools by focusing on account balance rather than media generation.
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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: before an expensive generation to verify sufficient credits. It does not mention explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the context is clear and no sibling tool serves the same purpose.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.