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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful scope context — that figures exclude shipping and cover every quantity tier — but says nothing about pagination, rate limits, or auth. That is adequate but not rich.

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?

Three short sentences with zero filler; the core purpose and the shipping exclusion are front-loaded, and the path 'GET /v3/products/{productUid}/prices' is appended without crowding. Every sentence contributes.

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 carries the burden of explaining returns, and 'production prices for every quantity tier' plus the shipping exclusion gives the agent a usable mental model of the response. It does not cover error cases or empty results, so it is not fully complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a conditional requirement the schema's required list does not capture: page_count is needed only for multi-page products. That meaningfully improves correct invocation of a parameter the schema marks as optional.

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 and resource ('Gelato's production prices of a product'), plus the scope ('for every quantity tier, optionally for one destination country and currency'), so an agent knows exactly what comes back. It also names the sibling it is not — 'Shipping is not included (use gelato_quote_order)' — which cleanly separates it from the quote 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?

Explicitly routes the agent to gelato_quote_order when shipping-inclusive pricing is needed, and flags the conditional prerequisite that page_count is required for multi-page products. It stops short of stating when-not-to-use cases beyond the shipping distinction, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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