Get rate limit usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context by specifying that the usage is 'from the most recent API call' (indicating it is a snapshot, not live) and by naming the default limits. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core function and followed by a practical usage hint. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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, no output schema) and strong annotations, the description is nearly complete. It explains the source of the data and provides default limits. A slight gap is that it does not specify the exact structure of the returned usage object, but this is not critical for a straightforward status-check tool.

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, and the schema is effectively 100% covered. According to the rubric, 0 parameters warrants a baseline of 4. The description focuses on the tool's output rather than parameter semantics, which is appropriate given no inputs exist.

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 what the tool does: it reports Strava's request usage from the most recent API call. The verb 'reported' and resource 'request usage' are specific, and it is distinct from sibling tools that fetch athlete data, activities, etc. The title reinforces the purpose.

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 advises checking this tool 'before issuing many requests,' providing clear usage context. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but there are no competing rate-limit tools among the siblings, so this is adequate.

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