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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds cost and authentication context ('Free, no profile needed') that is not present in annotations, which is valuable. It stops short of describing return format, freshness, or the level of detail in deposit rules.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource content and followed by the access condition. Every phrase contributes and nothing 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 zero-parameter, read-only pricing lookup with annotations already covering safety and idempotency, the description's content outline is largely sufficient. It could be slightly more complete by hinting at the form of the deposit rules or pricing freshness, but no output schema exists to require return-value documentation.

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?

This tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to supplement. The baseline score of 4 applies.

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 names a specific resource (pricing) and enumerates the exact content it covers: current prices, launch discount, founding-profile tiers, and deposit rules. Together with the title 'Get prices' and tool name, an agent can distinguish it from generic siblings like anthill_info.

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?

'Free, no profile needed' gives a useful access condition, but the description does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as anthill_info or anthill_deposit, nor does it mention any exclusions. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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