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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: results are per-source and unnormalized ("native currency"), and the call costs 1 credit. It does not describe freshness, caching, or what happens with an invalid id, so the added value is real but modest.

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 what is returned, followed by the currency caveat and cost. No filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage, the description is adequate; the "each source in its native currency" note pre-empts a likely normalization misunderstanding even without an output schema. Minor gaps remain around number of sources and whether values are spot or delayed.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single sealed_id parameter is documented as a Valo.Data sealed product id. The description adds no syntax, range, or provenance detail beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 uses a specific verb+resource combination ("Current prices of one sealed product") and scopes it to a single item, which separates it from batch/list siblings like search_sealed and get_cards_batch. It does not explicitly name which sibling to use for the card equivalent, but the sealed-vs-card distinction is implicit in the wording.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance beyond the implicit 'one sealed product' scoping. The description never mentions how to obtain a sealed_id, nor does it point to compare_prices or search_sealed as the alternative for multi-product or comparison needs.

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