get_pricing

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It indicates that the tool returns pricing data, but it does not mention any potential side effects, rate limits, authentication requirements, or data freshness. The description is straightforward but lacks depth.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences that front-load the purpose. There is no redundant or unnecessary phrasing.

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 the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate but could be improved by mentioning the format of the returned data (e.g., JSON object with endpoint keys) or any caching behavior. It misses an opportunity to fully inform the agent about the response structure.

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?

There are no parameters in the input schema, so the description does not need to add parameter information. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and no additional details are required.

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 that the tool retrieves pricing information for the AgentRadar API, specifying that it shows costs per endpoint, x402 micropayment amounts, and free tier details. This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_health or check_scam.

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 implies that one should use this tool to obtain pricing information, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention alternatives. For example, it could note that if you need cost calculations per request, this is the tool to use.

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