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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and discloses the return payload: indicative from-price in EUR, billable days, travel band, distance, and proof format. It also qualifies the price as indicative, but does not discuss permissions, rate limits, or side effects.

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 three tightly structured sentences, front-loaded with the core question and followed immediately by the return payload and parameter requirement. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 simple two-parameter tool with a rich input schema and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what is returned, the required parameter combination, and the intended usage context.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds semantic emphasis that both parameters must be supplied together to produce a valid quote, going slightly beyond the schema's required fields.

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 pricing resource and a clear scope: cost to send one person to a named city for one mission, with a defined return payload. It distinguishes itself from listing tools by its quotation purpose, though it does not name sibling tools explicitly.

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?

It clearly establishes that both mission and city are required and that neither alone yields a valid answer, and it directs the agent not to estimate manually. It does not name alternative tools or state when not to use this one.

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