Get Hemmiles pricing

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), yet the description still adds real value: the upstream source is schema.org Offer markup on the public pricing page, and it explicitly scopes results to publicly displayed list price, excluding negotiated, annual-discount, and promotional pricing. That is exactly the kind of caveat an agent needs before quoting a price.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence, then args, return shape, example, and caveat in a predictable order. The Args block largely restates the schema enums verbatim, which is mild redundancy, but nothing is truly wasted.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description summarizes the return payload (url, locale, currency, plans array) and, more importantly, states the coverage limitation of the data. An agent can decide whether to call it and how to present the result without further inference.

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 100% and both params have enums, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema: the default is the server locale, currency varies per market, and the example maps a natural-language question to a specific enum value.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get Hemmiles subscription pricing for a market') plus the data source ('parsed from the pricing page's schema.org Offer data'). No sibling tool covers pricing, so the resource alone separates it from list_pages, list_features, get_policies, etc.

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?

Gives a concrete triggering example ('How much is Hemmiles in India?' -> locale='in') and an explicit instruction ('Always pass the locale you care about'). It does not name a sibling alternative or state when-not to use it, but no sibling is a close substitute for pricing questions.

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