mullet_budget

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Query' implies a non-mutating read, and 'current' hints at fresh data, but scope (per-session vs per-project), whether it requires auth, and response shape are unstated.

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 short sentence with zero filler, front-loading the action and the two data points returned. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 no-parameter query tool with no output schema, the description minimally covers what is retrieved. It does not clarify the scope of 'token spend' or how it relates to the sibling mullet_status, leaving the agent to guess.

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, and the schema is empty, so there is nothing to document. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed to fetch spend and limits.

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 verb ('Query') and resource ('current token spend and budget limits'), making the read-only retrieval purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the many mullet_* siblings (e.g. mullet_status), so it stops short of a 5.

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 mullet_status or mullet_analyze, and no conditions or prerequisites are given. An agent must infer that this is the budget-specific query from the name alone.

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