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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds useful context by explaining that rates come live from the shop's multi-currency exchange-rate cache (WCML), which signals data freshness and source. It does not contradict the annotations.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every clause adds value. It avoids unnecessary repetition of schema or annotation information.

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?

For a simple read-only lookup with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately enumerates what the agent can expect (per-person rates, print pricing, gift card validity, session inclusions). It also notes the live-cache source, making the tool's behavior sufficiently transparent for 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 fully documents the optional currency parameter with pattern, examples, default, and fallback behavior. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning beyond mentioning multi-currency, so a baseline 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Return current pricing') and identifies the exact resource ('Mink Viking Experience'), listing the included data categories. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_business_info or check_availability.

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 clearly implies this tool is for retrieving current pricing details, which provides clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to sibling tools, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it for pricing requests.

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