civify_get_pay_per_cv_pricing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that pricing is localized with USD base and EGP regional currencies, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't state whether pricing can change, whether it requires authentication, or how the result is structured. Adequate but with gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then qualifies the currency scope. No 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?

For a zero-param, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers what is fetched and the currency dimensions but omits authentication needs, rate limits, or how pricing is consumed. It is minimally adequate but leaves behavioral questions unanswered.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description confirms no input is needed by describing a pure lookup, which aligns with the empty schema. No further parameter semantics are possible.

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 (Get) and resource (Pay-Per-CV single unlock pricing), with the added scope of localization and currencies. It is distinguishable from siblings like civify_get_account or civify_score_ats, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative. Clear but no explicit sibling differentiation beyond the resource name.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The agent must infer that this is called before a Pay-Per-CV unlock to determine cost, but nothing states that context or any prerequisites.

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