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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that this produces a firm quote rather than an order, explains the 3x/4x margin structure with floors, and states the 24h validity period. It does not describe the response format or side effects in detail, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 one dense but well-organized sentence: main behavior first, then pricing rules and validity. Every clause earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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 quote tool with no output schema, the description supplies the essential business rules: no ordering, pricing margins, floors, and 24-hour validity. The remaining gaps, such as the exact return format and full mapping of every enum value, are minor and do not block 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 description coverage is 50%, so the description needs to add value for the undocumented parameters. It adds pricing context for writing vs media products, but leaves currency and lengthTier unexplained, and some categories in the text (actors, packs, films) do not match the actual enum values in the schema, which can confuse an agent.

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 the specific action 'Firm price quote' and immediately contrasts it with ordering, while listing the product categories it covers. This clearly distinguishes the tool from inkflow_order and other siblings.

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?

'WITHOUT ordering' explicitly signals this is the pre-purchase pricing path, and the 24-hour validity window frames when the quote is actionable. It does not explicitly name inkflow_order as the ordering alternative, but the exclusion is clear enough for an agent to route correctly.

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