Estimate Infrastructure Costs

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the tool returns quick estimates and the cheapest option, which is consistent but does not elaborate on additional behavioral traits like rate limits or data freshness.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. It earns its place efficiently.

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?

With three parameters, a nested object, and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain parameter usage, optionality of 'providers', or the return format beyond 'cheapest option and savings percentage', leaving significant gaps for correct invocation.

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 does not explain any parameters. There is no mention of 'intent', 'requirements', or 'providers', leaving the agent with no semantic guidance beyond the schema structure.

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 title and description clearly state the tool's purpose: estimating infrastructure costs across AWS, GCP, and Azure. It is specific about returning the cheapest option and savings percentage, and distinguishes well from sibling tools like synlake_providers or synlake_usage.

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 implies usage for cost estimation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or preconditions. The context is clear but lacks direct guidance.

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