get_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It implies a read operation but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, authentication needs, or any side effects. More behavioral context is needed.

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 single short sentence, making it very concise and easy to scan. However, the extreme brevity sacrifices necessary detail, and the structure is minimal.

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 3 parameters with no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to explain the summary content, how to filter by project/model, default behavior, or return format. A much richer description is needed.

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 0%, so the description should explain all parameters. It only alludes to the 'period' parameter via 'for a time period,' but does not mention 'project' or 'model' parameters. These remain undefined, reducing clarity for the agent.

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 clearly states it retrieves a token usage and cost summary for a time period. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like export_csv (exports data) and get_hint_detail (per-hint details). However, it does not specify what exactly the summary contains (e.g., totals, breakdowns).

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_hint_detail for per-hint costs or export_csv for raw data. The agent must infer context from the name alone.

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