Normalize locale-explicit pack-size expressions and multipacks to exact grams, millilitres or counts; reject ambiguous text. FREE during validation. No key, credits, wallet or preparation needed. Supply your task in input. Existing source and input limits apply.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| input | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| scope | Yes | ||
| locale | Yes | ||
| quantities | Yes | ||
| allNormalized | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / maxPriceMicroUsdRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Optional legacy field; ignored in free mode.",
- "minimum": 0,
- "type": "integer"
-}Input schema / properties / requestIdRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Optional legacy field; ignored in free mode.",
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / maxPriceMicroUsd / descriptionPrevious value: -"Explicit maximum new debit; 0 means recovery only."New value: +"Optional legacy field; ignored in free mode."Input schema / properties / maxPriceMicroUsd / maximumRemoved value: -999999999999Input schema / properties / requestId / descriptionPrevious value: -"Persist the ID returned by agent_utilities_prepare. Reuse after uncertainty."New value: +"Optional legacy field; ignored in free mode."Input schema / properties / requestId / patternRemoved value: -"^\\d{13}_[A-Za-z0-9_-]{16,80}$"Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "input",
- "requestId",
- "maxPriceMicroUsd"
-]New value: +[
+ "input"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, destructiveHint false and openWorldHint false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond that: rejection of ambiguous text (error behavior), cost/auth transparency (free, no key/credits/wallet), and an explicit limits caveat. It does not explain rate limits or how partial failures within the quantities array are reported, so it stops short of 5.
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 core purpose is front-loaded and compact, but 'Supply your task in input' is filler and the two pricing sentences ('FREE during validation' / 'No key, credits, wallet or preparation needed') overlap, consuming space that could have documented the input shape.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, for a nested required input at 0% schema description coverage, the description leaves an agent guessing about how to build the payload, and the sibling preview tool is never referenced.
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 0% and the single required parameter is a nested object with a locale enum and a quantities array of {id, text} items with item/character caps. The description only says 'locale-explicit' and 'Supply your task in input', leaving structure, the id/text contract, and the 50-item/160-char limits entirely undocumented outside the schema.
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?
States a specific verb (normalize) and resource (locale-explicit pack-size expressions and multipacks) with a concrete output unit set (grams, millilitres, counts) plus an explicit failure condition (reject ambiguous text). It does not name the obvious sibling agent_utilities_pack_size_normalize_preview, so an agent must infer the preview vs real distinction, which keeps it from a 5.
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?
'FREE during validation' and 'Existing source and input limits apply' imply this belongs to a validation/preparation workflow, but no alternative tool is named and no when-not condition is given. 'Supply your task in input' adds no selection guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.