Get usage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It conveys that this is a read-oriented usage query by listing returned data, but it does not explicitly state that the call has no side effects, requires no parameters, or what happens if no usage data exists.

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 a compact list with no filler or repetition. It could gain a little from being a full sentence, but it is appropriately sized for a no-parameter getter.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should specify what the agent will receive, which it does at a high level (usage, limit, balance). It leaves unstated the scope and the exact meaning of 'monthly post usage,' but it is adequate for a trivial getter.

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?

There are zero parameters and the schema is complete for what exists, so the description has no parameter semantics to compensate for. The baseline 4 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 names a concrete resource (usage) and specifies three pieces of data: monthly post usage, plan limit, and credit balance. It stops short of an explicit verb, though the title's 'Get' supplies the action, and it is not clearly differentiated from analytics siblings.

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 given about when to call this tool instead of related tools such as get_analytics_summary or get_account. An agent is left to infer from the name that this concerns billing/limits rather than post performance.

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