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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context: the result is a rapid estimate, includes VAT, is scoped to one product, and is not the final order price. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 tight sentences with the primary action front-loaded and the sibling distinction in the second sentence. Every phrase contributes meaning, and there is no redundant 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?

The description is sufficient for tool selection and basic routing, but for a 6-parameter tool with a nested sizes object and no output schema, it would benefit from clarifying which parameters are expected together and how print-side heights are used. The sibling mention mitigates this partially, but invocation details remain incomplete.

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 50%, and the description adds some domain meaning by naming quantity/sizes and number of printed sides as price drivers. However, it does not clarify the required 'product' parameter, the role of 'promoCode', or how 'printSideHeightsCm' relates to the estimate, leaving part of the invocation behavior under-specified.

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 verb and resource: 'Rychlý odhad ceny JEDNOHO produktu (vč. DPH)', i.e., a quick price estimate for a single product including VAT. It also explicitly contrasts itself with quote_order, which returns the exact full-order price, clearly differentiating it from the sibling tool.

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 provides explicit routing guidance: use this tool for a quick single-product estimate, and use quote_order for the exact order total including shipping, coupon, and delivery date. This is a clear when-to-use / when-not-to-use statement with a named alternative.

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