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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses return values (unit_price_zar, total_price_zar) and that VAT is included, adding useful behavioral context. It also hints at the next step in the flow. While it does not explicitly state side-effect-free behavior, the 'Get' prefix and the focus on returning values imply a read-only operation.

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 long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes necessary prerequisites and next steps. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by naming the return values and confirming VAT inclusion. It covers purpose, prerequisites, and next step. Optional parameters are fully described in the schema, so their absence in the description is not a major gap. Missing edge-case handling, but sufficient for correct invocation.

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 input schema covers all parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description reinforces which parameters are required and specifies the source of product_id, but it does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 function: 'Get an exact ZAR price for a product at specific dimensions.' This provides a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('price'), and scope ('product at specific dimensions'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_product or get_delivery_estimate.

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 context: it requires product_id from search_products or lookup_catalog, and directs to call configure_product next. This establishes a clear workflow and prerequisites, though it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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