Chi phí MONA Cloud theo kỳ

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It states the operation is a read ('Đọc'), but does not disclose output format, currency, tax inclusion, timezone handling, or pagination. It is minimally transparent but leaves significant behavior unspecified.

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, compact sentence that conveys the core purpose and parameter semantics without redundancy. Every element earns its place and the main scope is front-loaded.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter meaning. However, it does not describe response contents beyond 'usage and total money', and offers no usage guidance or notes on output currency/format, leaving room for ambiguity.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps 'theo tháng' to the period parameter and 'lọc sản phẩm' to the product parameter, which adds real semantic meaning. However, it does not explain period format, requiredness, or product value expectations beyond what the schema pattern already suggests.

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 states a specific action ('Đọc' = read) on a specific resource (MonA Cloud usage and total cost by month), with an optional product filter. This is clear and matches the title, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from cost-adjacent siblings like cloud_ledger or cloud_invoice_list.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cloud_ledger, cloud_balance, or invoice tools. The description implies it is for monthly usage/cost lookups but provides no exclusions or comparison context.

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