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

Annotations establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds real context on top: the result is a pre-tax estimate, tax is deferred to Stripe at checkout, and shipping is restricted to the US. It stops short of describing failure behavior for unsupported destinations or invalid work identifiers.

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 sentences with no padding, and the price-breakdown scope is front-loaded ahead of the US-shipping and tax caveats. Every clause carries information an agent would otherwise have to infer.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the return values and covers the key constraint (US-only, tax excluded), which is what an agent needs to present a quote. It leaves minor gaps around invalid-input handling and the relationship to create_checkout, but is largely complete for this tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 80%, so the schema already documents size, work, frame, and the nested ship_to fields; the description only reinforces the ship_to constraint with 'Ships to the US only.' It adds no new meaning for work, frame, size, or quantity, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 gives a specific verb ('Price') and resource ('a framed print'), then enumerates exactly what the response contains: unit price, subtotal, shipping, total before tax, plus a policy summary. That distinguishes it functionally from create_checkout, but it never names a sibling, so differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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?

Usage is only implied: the mention that 'tax is calculated by Stripe at checkout' quietly points toward the checkout flow, and 'Ships to the US only' sets a precondition. There is no explicit statement of when to call this versus create_checkout or get_order_status, and no stated prerequisite on the ordering flow.

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