Get TTS Usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context by specifying the statistic is characters consumed per day, but it does not disclose the return format or any potential quirks. For a simple read-only stats tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the first states the tool's function and metric, the second states its purpose. The information is front-loaded and every word contributes 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, one optional parameter, full schema coverage, and readOnly annotation, the description is nearly complete. It could clarify the output shape (e.g., a time series of daily character counts), but this is a minor gap for a straightforward usage-stats endpoint.

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%, with the single 'days' parameter fully documented including default, minimum, and maximum. The description does not need to repeat parameter details; the baseline of 3 applies since the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 and resource: 'Returns TTS (text-to-speech) usage stats — characters consumed per day.' This clearly identifies the tool's function and metric, and it is distinct from all sibling tools, none of which relate to TTS usage or cost monitoring.

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 provides explicit use context: 'Useful for monitoring costs and usage trends.' There are no analogous sibling tools for TTS usage, so an explicit alternative comparison is unnecessary; the intended use case is clear enough for an agent to select this tool.

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