get_price

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that it reads only the local database and that 'found: false' indicates the item has not been priced, distinguishing this from unsellable. It also mentions the 'market_status' check, providing important behavioral context beyond what the schema shows.

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 concise and well-structured. It begins with the core purpose in one sentence, then adds a clarifying note about behavior. Every sentence adds value—the first defines the output, the second clarifies a common misunderstanding, and the third suggests an alternative action. 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?

The description is quite complete for a simple lookup tool. It mentions the output schema includes 'found', spread, and confidence, which is not in the schema description. It also provides guidance for handle missing data. However, it does not explain the 'league' parameter's role or how to handle empty values, which could be a gap for agents that need to specify league correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. The description explains what 'item_key' refers to (one item) but does not elaborate on the 'league' parameter, its default, or its effect on results. The description adds some value by clarifying the single-item scope but leaves the league parameter unexplained, which could lead to misuse.

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 purpose: it retrieves the latest recorded price for an item, including spread and confidence. It specifies the verb 'get' and the resource 'price' for a 'one item', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_price_history' and 'find_listings'.

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 explains that it reads only the local database, providing context on when to use it. It also notes that 'found: false' is not the same as unsellable, and points to 'market_status' for further verification, which gives clear usage guidance for handling edge cases.

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