estimate_query_cost

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It states it 'returns the number of credits...without actually running the query,' indicating a read-only, safe operation. It lacks explicit mention of no side effects but is otherwise 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 concise with two paragraphs, front-loading the main purpose. The parameter list is structured and readable, with no superfluous content.

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 7 parameters and an output schema, the description covers essential behavior (cost estimate, no query execution). It could mention that it's safe to call multiple times, but overall it's sufficiently complete for its simple purpose.

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 coverage is 0%, so description adds value by listing each parameter with a brief explanation (e.g., 'lat_min: Southern boundary latitude'). This clarifies meaning beyond the schema's titles, though it could provide more detail like example values.

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 'Estimate the credit cost of a climate query before running it,' providing a specific verb (estimate) and resource (credit cost). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'query_climate' and 'query_climate_point' by positioning itself as a pre-check tool.

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 explicitly advises 'Use this before large queries (multi-year, large bounding box) to check the cost,' giving clear guidance on when to use. It does not directly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context implies it for cost estimation only.

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