Skip to main content
Glama

Tomorrow Central: Cloud Cost Sentinel

Price an architecture you can describe (no account needed)

estimate_cost
Read-only

Price a list of cloud components at real list prices. No account or signup.

Use this when the user can name the pieces: "two m5.large servers, a Postgres
database and a load balancer in Mumbai". If they cannot name the pieces, use
`describe_workload` instead, which asks in units a person actually has.

`items` is a list of `{"component": "<id>", "params": {...}}`. Get the ids and
each component's parameters from `list_cost_building_blocks` and use them
verbatim: a name you invent will be rejected, which is deliberate.

`region` is an AWS region id such as `ap-south-1`.

The reply is a RANGE, not a number: `monthly_total` has low, expected and high,
because several inputs are genuinely uncertain and a single figure would hide
that. `swing_factor` names the one input that most widens the range, which is
the most useful sentence in the reply: it tells the user what to go and measure.
`concentration` ranks the lines by share of the bill. `assumptions` lists every
value that was defaulted rather than given, and `traps` lists costs this
architecture usually incurs that the caller did not ask for, such as public IPv4
addresses or database storage billed apart from the database.

`gaps` lists anything that could not be priced. It is never silently treated as
zero. If a line is missing, the total is missing that line, and the gap says so.

These are AWS on-demand list prices before any discount, credit or committed-use
agreement, and they exclude tax. Treat the result as an upper bound on a real
bill and never as a quote.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
termNoOnDemand
itemsYes
regionYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses important behavioral details: output is a range rather than a single number, gaps are reported and never silently treated as zero, prices are on-demand list prices before discounts/tax, and committed-use discounts are excluded. This gives the agent an accurate model of what the result means.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense and well organized, with each paragraph covering input, output, and pricing basis. It is slightly long and repeats the 'no account needed' framing from the title, but nearly every sentence adds needed operational detail, so the length is justified.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema present, the description compensates thoroughly: it names the key response fields (monthly_total range, term, assumptions, traps, gaps) and explains how gaps affect the result. It also covers edge cases like missing items and excluded discounts, so an agent has enough context to invoke and interpret the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema provides no property descriptions, so the description is the only semantic source. It defines items as objects with id/params sourced from list_cost_building_blocks and clarifies region as an AWS region such as ap-south-1. The term parameter is only implied ('AWS on-demand list prices'), but the default in the schema and the text together make it understandable.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a clear verb-resource pair ('estimate cost at real list prices') and immediately distinguishes this tool from describe_workload: use it when the caller can name specific pieces. It also references list_cost_building_blocks as the source for valid IDs, making the tool's role in the family unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit conditional guidance is provided: if the user can name components, use this tool; if they cannot, use describe_workload. It also instructs the agent to fetch IDs from list_cost_building_blocks and warns that invented IDs are rejected, which is actionable direction for correct invocation.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources