Show account storage

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive behavior. The description adds content-level transparency by specifying that it reports generation space consumed versus plan allowance, which is beyond what the annotations convey. No contradiction.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and then clarifies the specific metric. Every phrase earns its place with no filler or restating of the title.

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 parameterless, read-only tool with rich annotations, the description fully conveys why and when to call it, including the storage/plan comparison that the response will express. No output schema is needed for this level of complexity.

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 there is no parameter detail for the description to add. The baseline of 4 applies for a no-parameter tool.

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 ('Show') and resource ('storage metadata'), and defines the exact scope: account generations' space usage against the plan allowance. This distinguishes it from sibling list/creation tools despite no sibling with similar storage purpose.

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?

Clear context is provided: the tool returns storage usage data the web app exposes, so an agent can know when checking account quota/usage is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling handles storage, so no alternative routing is needed.

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