list_prices

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating it's a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond this: it explains pagination behavior ('Results are paginated'), currency units ('Amounts are in the smallest currency unit'), and includes details on the 'include' parameter for related entities. This enhances understanding without contradicting annotations.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. It uses bullet points effectively for the 'include' parameter details, but some sentences could be more concise (e.g., the pagination explanation is slightly verbose). Overall, it's efficient with minimal waste.

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 (9 parameters, pagination, filtering) and the absence of an output schema, the description does a good job covering key aspects: purpose, pagination, filtering options, currency units, and related entities. However, it could improve by mentioning response format or error handling to be fully complete for a list tool.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 9 parameters thoroughly. The description adds some semantic context, such as recommending a default for 'perPage' and explaining how 'after' works with pagination, but doesn't provide significant additional meaning beyond what the schema specifies. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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: 'list prices in the account's catalog.' It specifies the verb ('list') and resource ('prices'), making it easy to understand. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_price' (singular) or 'preview_prices,' which might be used for different scenarios.

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 some implied usage guidance, such as recommending to 'use the maximum perPage by default (200) to ensure comprehensive results' and explaining when to use the 'after' parameter for pagination. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives (e.g., compared to 'get_price' for a single price or 'preview_prices' for estimates), and doesn't mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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