wafle_ai_usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the default date range behavior ('defaults to last 30 days'), which is useful. However, it does not describe the exact return shape (e.g., whether cost is in cents, currency, or interval buckets), leaving some opacity.

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?

Two sentences deliver the core purpose, use case, and default behavior with no fluff. The key information is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 read-only aggregate with two well-documented parameters and strong annotations, the description is sufficient. It covers what, when, and the default time window. A brief note on return format would push it to 5, but it's complete enough for typical invocation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%: both 'slug' and 'since' have clear descriptions. The description only repeats the default date behavior already present in the schema, adding no new parameter-level meaning beyond what's structured.

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 identifies the resource ('Token + cost aggregate for a store') and the time scope ('since a date'). It also distinguishes from sibling analytics tools by explicitly targeting AI usage data and mentioning the AI dashboard chart use case.

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 provides explicit use context: 'Use for the AI dashboard chart and quota guidance.' It does not name alternative tools, but the specific use case is enough for an AI agent to select this over generic analytics tools.

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