jlcpcb_get_component_pricing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the data is 'live' and provides USD unit prices per quantity break, which is useful behavioral info. However, it does not mention potential rate limits, return format details, or error behavior, leaving some gaps for a read operation.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently states the tool's purpose and output. Every word adds value, and there is no redundant or extra information.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately explains what it returns (pricing tiers). It covers the essential information needed for correct invocation and interpretation, though it could theoretically mention if prices exclude taxes or fees, but that's not critical.

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?

The input schema already documents the single required parameter 'lcsc' with examples and format details (e.g., 'C17976' and optional 'C'). The description does not add any further meaning to the parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get' and clearly specifies the resource ('live quantity-break pricing tiers') for a specific JLCPCB part. It distinguishes from siblings like get_component_stock or get_component_details by emphasizing pricing rather than stock or general details.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for retrieving pricing tiers, which gives clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is specific enough that an agent would select this over sibling tools for pricing queries.

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