seameet_get_usage

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses a safe read operation ('usage vs quota') and implies no destructive behavior. It could be more detailed (e.g., response format) but is adequate.

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?

Single sentence with no filler, front-loading purpose. Concise and 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 no output schema or annotations, the description is minimally complete for a simple read tool. It covers the return type (usage vs quota) and scope (authenticated account). Could mention if it's a summary or detailed breakdown.

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?

No parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. With zero parameters, baseline is 4. Description adds no parameter info, which is fine.

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 returns 'storage usage vs quota for the authenticated account', which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (webhooks, recordings, etc.) by focusing on storage.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives given, but the context of sibling tools (all webhook/recording related) implies this is the only storage-related tool. Some guidance on authentication being required would improve it.

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