cycles_commit

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

Discloses that it finalizes charge and releases unused amount. However, it omits behavior on idempotency (despite requiring idempotencyKey), side effects of re-calling, and error scenarios. With no annotations, more detail would improve transparency.

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?

Two concise sentences delivering essential usage instruction and outcome. No fluff, front-loaded with the core action.

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 complexity (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is too sparse. It fails to explain parameter construction, return value, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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%. The description explains none of the five parameters or their nested structures (e.g., actual.unit, metrics). Agents cannot infer how to construct input from the description alone.

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 commits actual usage after an operation, finalizes the budget charge, and releases unused reserved amount. It also positions itself relative to cycles_reserve, distinguishing from siblings like cycles_release.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call after cycles_reserve regardless of success/failure. Could further clarify when not to use (e.g., cycles_release for pure release without commit), but the guidance is strong and specific.

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