Баланс и лимиты / Balance and limits

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive behavior, but the description adds crucial context: 'Cost: free — this call consumes neither quota nor rate limit, so call it freely.' It also discloses return values ('Returns: balance, quota used, reset time and the price list') since there is no output schema. No contradiction with annotations.

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 English description is efficiently structured with a purpose statement, 'Use when' scenarios, returns, and cost. Every sentence earns its place, and the information is front-loaded. Though duplicated in Russian, the English portion is concise and well-organized.

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?

For a simple parameter-less tool, the description covers all necessary context: what it does, when to use it, what it returns, and that it's free. It is fully self-contained even without an output schema, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke 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 baseline is 4. The description explicitly confirms this: 'Takes no parameters.' This removes any ambiguity and adds value beyond the empty input schema, warranting a 5.

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: 'Shows the remaining balance, daily quota usage, when the window resets, and the price of every tool in credits.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that directly distinguishes it from sibling tools, none of which handle usage or balance.

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 provides usage scenarios: 'Use when: a call failed with [rate_limited]...; the user asks about balance or spending; you are about to run a large batch...' This gives clear guidance on when to invoke this tool versus alternatives, fulfilling the dimension completely.

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