List usage records

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The only added behavioral fact is 'paginated', which the schema's per_page description already conveys, so the description contributes essentially nothing beyond structured data.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, which is efficient. It is arguably too terse for a five-parameter, filterable list tool, but no sentence is wasted.

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 list tool with five optional filters (account, include, subscription_item_id, page, per_page), no output schema, and openWorldHint, the description omits how records are scoped, whether filters are ANDed, and what pagination fields come back. An agent lacks the context needed to use the filters 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?

Schema description coverage is 80% with documented params for account, include, per_page, and subscription_item_id, so the schema carries the param burden. The description adds no filter syntax, default, or relationship meaning beyond what the schema already states, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a clear verb (returns a list) and resource (usage records) with a scope hint (paginated). However, it does nothing to distinguish this from siblings like list_subscription_items or get_subscription_item_current_usage, so an agent gets a clear but undifferentiated 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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and never mentions the related siblings (create_usage_record, get_usage_record) or when a filtered list would be preferable. Nothing routes the agent to or away from this tool.

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