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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds valuable details: exact price, VAT included, and return fields. However, it does not disclose the behavioral impact of the province parameter (which changes contact details based on location) or any potential limitations or side effects. This is a notable gap for a tool with no annotation safety profile.

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 three sentences: purpose, required inputs and returns, and the next step in the workflow. It is front-loaded with the core action, has no filler, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description rightly explains returns (unit_price_zar, total_price_zar, VAT included). It also provides workflow context. It omits the province effect on output and error handling, but for a straightforward price lookup, the description is adequate and complete enough.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds one useful nugget: product_id should come from search_products or lookup_catalog. It does not clarify the semantics of finish, province, or quantity beyond what the schema already says, providing no extra interpretive value.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get an exact ZAR price for a product at specific dimensions.' It clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_product and get_delivery_estimate by focusing on pricing and dimension-based calculation. It also mentions key return fields (unit_price_zar, total_price_zar), leaving no doubt about its purpose.

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 provides clear usage context: it requires product_id from search_products or lookup_catalog, and instructs to call configure_product next to lock in colour and mount type before cart creation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the workflow direction is clear and helpful.

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