unlimited_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It transparently reveals the tool reads three endpoints (/workspaces/unlim-activations, /subscriptions/bundle/all-unlim/status, /user) and explains the meaning of an empty activations list. This goes beyond basic description.

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 concise with three sentences, each adding distinct information: purpose, data sources, and implication of empty list. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. A tiny improvement could be structuring the parameter explanation, but it is already efficient.

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 the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. It adequately explains the significance of an empty activations list. However, the lack of explanation for the 'account' parameter leaves a gap in completeness for a tool with one optional parameter.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description should explain the 'account' parameter. However, it does not mention what the parameter is for (e.g., account identifier, workspace ID). The description adds no value beyond the parameter name, leaving the agent guessing its semantics.

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 the tool's purpose: checking which models are currently unlimited-active for the account. It uses a specific verb ('reads') and resource ('unlimited status'), and the focus on 'unlimited-active' distinguishes it from sibling tools like auth_status or account_info.

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 context on when to use the tool: to check if unlimited status is active, and notes that an empty activations list means generation costs credits, referencing estimate_cost for cost estimation. This implies when not to rely on unlimited status, but explicit 'when-not' or alternatives beyond estimate_cost are not given.

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