Get Quota

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: 'Free — no credits consumed' clarifies that the operation itself has no cost, which is critical for a quota tool. It also discloses the response structure precisely, including the status field with possible values.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: it opens with the core purpose, then adds the no-credits detail and usage timing, followed by a clear return block and example prompts. Every section earns its place, and the length is appropriate.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters) and the presence of formal annotations plus a detailed return schema in the description, the description covers all essential context: purpose, usage scenario, return payload, and example queries. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description correctly omits parameter details; the empty schema makes this self-evident. Baseline of 4 applies due to 0 parameters.

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 function with a specific verb and resource: 'Get current credit balance and plan details for your API key.' It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on account/quota status, and specifies the return contents (plan tier, billing period, usage breakdown).

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 explicitly instructs when to use the tool: 'Check this before running credit-consuming operations (extract, summarize, etc.) to avoid QUOTA_EXCEEDED errors.' This provides clear contextual guidance, and the example prompts reinforce typical usage. It does not need alternatives since no competing tool exists.

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