Get block storage cost estimate

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

The description reinforces the safety profile the annotations already declare (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false) with "without creating it", and the "same arguments as create" line is genuinely useful. But it says nothing about the nature of the returned estimate — currency, monthly vs hourly granularity, or whether pricing is live given openWorldHint=true — which is the behavior an agent most needs here.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, with the core action and the no-side-effect guarantee front-loaded before the argument-mapping note.

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 three-param read-only tool with full schema coverage and declared annotations, this is nearly complete. The one real gap is the absence of any hint about return shape (price fields, currency, period), which matters since there is no output schema.

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 name, region, and sizeGb are already documented, and the baseline is 3. The "same arguments as create_block_storage_volume" clause adds a useful framing that the inputs describe an intended volume, but no parameter-specific meaning 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?

"Preview the price of a block storage volume configuration" gives a specific verb (preview/price) and resource (block storage volume configuration), and immediately contrasts it with create_block_storage_volume, so an agent can distinguish cost-estimate tools from the mutation tools.

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 creating it" clearly establishes the when: use this to price a configuration before provisioning. However, it doesn't explicitly say when not to use it (e.g. when a volume already exists, call list_block_storage_volumes) or name the other cost-estimate siblings as alternatives.

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