Record Usage Event

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

Adds value beyond annotations: 'applied atomically to all derived scopes' and 'fire-and-forget'. Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive. No contradictions.

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?

Three concise sentences, no redundancy. Every sentence adds meaningful information.

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 8 parameters, 3 required, nested objects, and no schema descriptions, the description lacks sufficient detail for correct invocation. Missing parameter guidance.

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?

Description does not explain any parameters despite 0% schema description coverage and complex nested objects. Agent relies solely on schema structure without contextual intent.

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 specific verb 'Record' and resource 'usage event'. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly contrasting with the reserve/commit lifecycle.

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?

Describes when to use: 'fire-and-forget metering of completed operations where pre-estimation is not available'. Implicitly excludes the reserve/commit lifecycle. Lacks explicit exclusion of alternatives but clear context.

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