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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool is 'Free' and 'no order is created,' indicating it is non-destructive. However, it lacks details on authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens with invalid input, which would be beneficial.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every word contributes meaning. It is highly concise with no filler.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters (including a nested object) and no output schema, the description is somewhat adequate. It explains the tool's purpose and usage, but does not specify the return format or error behavior, leaving the agent to infer what 'exact total' means. More detail on response structure would improve completeness.

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 has 100% coverage, but the description adds valuable context: voice is 'accepted for parity with create_gift' and does not affect price; format is limited to 'manual_v1'; ship_to destination affects total and tax; image_model is optional and may add cost. This goes beyond the schema definitions.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Compute the exact total for a hypothetical gift... before you commit.' It specifies the resource (gift pricing) and the action (compute total), and distinguishes it from sibling tool create_gift by noting it doesn't create an order.

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 explicitly advises to 'Call before create_gift so you know the charge,' providing clear usage context. It also notes the tool is 'Free, no order is created,' implying it's safe to use. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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