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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true; the description reinforces this with 'Nothing is booked', resolving the natural worry about POST /v2/jobs/pricing looking like a write. It omits quote validity/expiry behavior and any rate-limit context, which is the remaining gap for a pricing call.

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?

Front-loads the payoff (what the price returns) in the first clause, then the side-effect guarantee, then the inputs, then the upstream endpoint. Four short clauses, no filler, nothing that could be cut.

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 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description does the one thing needed—it summarizes the shape of the response (tax-exclusive and tax-inclusive amounts plus currency). It does not cover multi-dropoff pricing behavior or quote expiry, which an agent pricing a job might care about.

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 100%, so the nested pickup/dropoffs structure, contact rules, coordinates and E.164 phone format are all already documented. The description only restates the required trio (pickup address, dropoff address, package type) and actually understates it—schema requires a single pickup plus 1–8 dropoffs with richer contact obligations—so it adds little 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?

States a specific verb+resource (price of a job) and enumerates the returned values (amount excl./incl. tax, currency), which separates it from stuart_create_job and stuart_validate_job without opening any schema. The 'before you create it' framing makes the lifecycle position unambiguous.

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?

Gives clear context—call it before creating the job—and explicitly states 'Nothing is booked', which is the key decision input for a pre-flight quote. It stops short of naming the sibling to call next (stuart_create_job) or of distinguishing it from stuart_validate_address, so not a full when/when-not/alternatives treatment.

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