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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, closed-world, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful output context beyond that: official retail and wholesale prices, unit normalization, source date, and a citable URL. It does not cover missing-data behavior or coverage limits, keeping it below a 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the return value and scope, followed by a concise usage trigger. There is no redundant or low-value text.

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?

With no output schema, the description still explains the returned data well: retail and wholesale price, unit normalization, source date, and citable URL. For a three-parameter read-only lookup with full schema coverage and clear annotations, this is 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains the optional date default, bilingual district examples, and bilingual commodity examples. The description reinforces that the scope is one commodity in one district and one date, but adds no parameter-specific syntax or constraints beyond 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: return the official daily retail and wholesale price of one agricultural commodity in one district of Bangladesh. Its scope of one commodity and one district also distinguishes it from siblings like compare_districts and get_price_trend without needing to name them.

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?

It gives a clear trigger: use whenever a user asks what a commodity costs today or on a given date in a given place. It does not explicitly exclude cases or name the sibling tools, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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