Cotiza un plan por cantidad y devuelve la aritmética, no sólo el total. IMPORTANTE: el subtotal NO incluye impuestos y por lo tanto no es un precio final al consumidor; la respuesta explica por qué. Al presentarlo hay que decirlo.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| quantity | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations indicate read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, which are already transparent. The description adds that it returns arithmetic and that the response explains why the subtotal excludes taxes, but it does not fully detail the output format or any other side effects. This is a moderate addition beyond annotations.
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 concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes a clear caveat about taxes. It avoids unnecessary verbosity, though the repeated emphasis on taxes could be seen as slightly redundant, but overall it is well-structured.
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?
The description provides some context (returns arithmetic, tax exclusion, presentation instruction) but lacks details on the expected response structure, error behavior, or how the 'name' parameter affects the quote. Given the simplicity of the tool, it is not fully complete.
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 schema defines two parameters (name, quantity) with no descriptions, and the description only indirectly refers to 'cantidad' (quantity) but does not explain the 'name' parameter or clarify what values are expected. With 0% schema coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving parameter semantics unclear.
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 that the tool quotes a plan based on quantity and returns arithmetic rather than just a total, which distinguishes it from simple total calculators. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the purpose is specific and comprehensible.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools (e.g., catalog_status, compare_products). It only mentions the tool's behavior and a presentation instruction, not the conditions or context for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Cada herramienta tiene un propósito claramente diferenciado: estado del catálogo, búsqueda, comparación, ficha, cotización, pedido, infraestructura, políticas y SLA. Aunque varias empiezan por get_, sus dominios no se solapan y las descripciones refuerzan cuándo usar cada una.
La mayoría sigue el patrón verbo_sustantivo en snake_case (search_products, compare_products, create_draft_order, get_product). Se desvían quote, que es solo un verbo, y catalog_status, que parece un sintagma nominal en lugar de get_catalog_status; son desviaciones menores y no generan confusión.
Nueve herramientas es un tamaño adecuado para un catálogo de hosting: cubren consulta, comparación, cotización y pedido sin llegar a ser un servidor de administración. Cada herramienta tiene un rol claro y ninguna sobra.
El flujo principal está completo: conocer la frescura del catálogo, buscar, comparar, obtener fichas, cotizar y crear un pedido en borrador, además de las consultas legales, de SLA e infraestructura. No se echan en falta operaciones de escritura porque el servidor es explícitamente de consulta y no cobra ni contrata.