metering__usage_timeseries

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses that est_accrued_minor is an estimate and that the data is bucketed per recorded_at. However, it does not describe response size, pagination, idempotency, or whether the operation is read-only. More detail on output format and potential latency would help.

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?

Description is concise with three sentences, front-loading the core functionality and key differentiation. No redundant information. Could be improved by structuring parameter descriptions, but it is efficient and readable.

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?

Given 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is moderately complete. It explains the high-level purpose and some parameters, but lacks details on time range, meter_id filter, and output format. An agent might struggle with exact usage without additional inferred knowledge.

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 0%, so description must explain all parameters. It covers bucket (day/hour), and mentions breakdowns by consumer_class, channel, provider. However, it fails to explain since, until, meter_id, include_test. The time range is implied but not explicitly described, and the purpose of include_test is absent.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves usage time series bucketed by recorded_at, grouped by provider, with breakdowns by consumer_class/channel/provider. It distinguishes from usage_summary by noting est_accrued_minor is an estimate and authoritative billing stays with usage_summary.

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?

Provides some guidance by stating it's a real time-series primitive independent of meter creation times, and that est_accrued_minor is not authoritative. However, lacks explicit when-to-use versus alternatives like usage_summary or sla_report, and no mention of prerequisites or context for filtering.

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