cloudflare_worker_usage

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

The description implies a read-only query by stating 'Query' and describing the output, but it does not explicitly confirm safety, authentication needs, rate limits, or other behavioral aspects. With no annotations, additional transparency would be beneficial.

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 concise sentences that front-load the core purpose ('Query Workers usage summary') and efficiently detail the output. Every word adds value.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description clearly explains what the tool returns (ranked scripts, request count, error rates, CPU percentiles). With only two optional parameters documented in the schema, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and output.

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 100% with both parameters already described in the input schema. The tool description adds no additional context about the parameters beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 queries Workers usage summary per-script aggregated, and specifies the output: scripts ranked by total request count with error rates and CPU time percentiles. This distinguishes it from other worker tools like cloudflare_worker_analytics.

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 alternatives such as cloudflare_worker_analytics or other query tools. The description does not mention scenarios or exclusions.

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