get_pricing

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses caching: disk location, TTL, env variable override, and force_refresh behavior. This is good transparency for a read tool, but could mention it is read-only and safe to call repeatedly.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then details. Uses code formatting for parameter and env var. No wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema, the description does not explain the return structure. For a simple pricing table, this might be acceptable, but listing what fields are returned (e.g., TLD, renewal price, etc.) would improve completeness.

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?

Only one parameter (force_refresh) with 0% schema description coverage. The description fully explains it: 'bypasses the cache and refetches live.' Adds value beyond 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?

The description clearly states 'Public TLD pricing table from Porkbun', specifying the verb (get) and resource (pricing for public TLDs). It distinguishes from sibling tool get_pricing_for_tld which is more specific.

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 mentions caching behavior and force_refresh parameter, implying when to use cache vs live data. However, it does not explicitly contrast with get_pricing_for_tld or state when not to use this tool.

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