marketplace_key_usage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns usage statistics and quota status, but does not disclose whether it's read-only (though 'Get' implies it), what quota limits mean, or any permissions/ownership requirements. This adds little behavioral context beyond what the name already conveys.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose without any fluff or unnecessary details. It earns every word.

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 only one parameter and no output schema, the description gives a basic overview but misses details about what exactly the usage statistics include, how quota status is represented, and how this relates to other marketplace key management tools. It is minimally viable but has gaps.

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 input schema covers 100% of the single parameter 'keyId' with a clear description ('The key ID to check'), so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any extra meaning for the parameter, just the generic term 'API key'.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly names the resource ('usage statistics and quota status for an API key'). It clearly states what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'marketplace_usage_history' or 'marketplace_list_api_keys'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It does not mention any related tools or specific scenarios, leaving the agent without direction for selection.

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