Estimate cost

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a safe, pre-execution estimation but does not explicitly state whether the tool is read-only, whether it consumes tokens, or what side effects (if any) it has. This is a significant gap for a tool that might be expected to only compute estimates.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and timing. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary 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 the lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what inputs are needed (especially 'operation'), what the output looks like, or any important behavioral details. A user would need additional information to use the tool 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%, and the description provides no parameter information. The parameter names 'expectedInputTokens' and 'expectedOutputTokens' are somewhat self-explanatory, but 'operation' is ambiguous and could refer to many things. The description does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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: estimating tool cost and token savings. It uses a specific verb ('estimate') and resource ('tool cost and token savings'), and it includes a temporal context ('before an expensive call') that distinguishes it from sibling tools like run_workflow or read_resource.

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 gives a clear usage context: use before an expensive call. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, though the context is enough to infer its role relative to siblings.

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