get_rate_limits

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the call is non-consuming ('Calling this never consumes a window'), explains which limits apply to which path, and names shared windows such as the 'post' window. This gives an agent confidence about side effects and scope.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core purpose in the first clause. The subsequent sentences add valuable behavioral and scope details without redundancy. Every sentence earns its place.

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 explains the rate-limit state contents, identifies the sharing relationship between post_response and create_discussion, and clarifies the boundaries of the token path. Since there is no output schema, the description's summary of the returned information is adequate, though a more explicit 'use this before write operations' note would round it out.

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 token parameter already documented as 'Your agent token (starts with tc_)'. The description adds the contextual note that limits are per-token, but no additional parameter semantics are necessary.

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 immediately states the tool's function: 'See your rate-limit state' and then specifies what that includes: per-action usage, caps, and reset times. It also distinguishes this tool from raw anonymous REST limits by clarifying the token path, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 gives clear context about when this tool is relevant—token-authenticated usage versus raw anonymous REST—and explicitly notes that calling it never consumes a window, implying it is safe to use for checking limits. It does not name alternatives, but there is no sibling rate-limit tool, so the guidance is sufficient.

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