get_usage

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. The verb 'Show' implies a read-only operation, which is transparent. It does not mention side effects or potential errors, but nothing about the operation suggests any, so the description 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that efficiently lists the key information returned (requests, channels, words, expiry). It is well-structured and free of unnecessary detail.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description outlines the expected contents of the response (usage vs. quota, package expiry), giving the agent a clear picture of what to expect from the call.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately explains what the tool does without needing to describe any parameters. No conflict or missing information exists.

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 purpose: displaying TGStat API usage and quota, including specific metrics (requests, channels, words) and package expiry. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve channel/post/word data.

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 implicitly indicates this tool is for checking API consumption, which is distinct from data-retrieval siblings. However, it lacks explicit 'use when' or 'instead of' guidance, so a full 5 is not warranted.

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