jlcpcb_pcb_calculate_price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'no order is placed' (non-mutating) and 'Requires API credentials' (authentication), which are valuable behavioral traits. It does not mention rate limits, error handling, or return format, but given the quote-only nature, it is appropriately transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then adding parameter guidance and credentials. Every sentence earns its place with no verbose or redundant text.

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 complexity (nested params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely complete: it states the purpose, input structure, credential requirement, and the non-mutating nature. It could include return value details, but the mention of 'price and lead time' sufficiently communicates the output expectation.

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 schema already covers the 'params' object with 100% coverage, listing all keys. The description adds extra value by elaborating on pcbParam with '(layers, dimensions, quantity, ...)', providing more meaning than the schema alone. This exceeds the baseline of 3.

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 the tool's function: 'calculate price and lead time for a PCB / SMT-stencil order'. It uses specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it is the 'Official PCB API' and that it provides 'a quote, no order is placed', differentiating it from order-placement 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?

The description provides clear context: it is for quoting PCB/SMT-stencil orders, not placing them. It mentions the required credential and the input structure. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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