lib_get_bom_with_pricing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It indicates 'live' pricing, implying a network call to an external source, but does not explain latency, cost fetching behavior, or whether it requires prior setup. It also does not disclose that it is a read-only operation or what 'live' means in terms of data freshness. This is insufficient for a tool that likely fetches external data.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words, which is good. However, it is under-specified, providing only a high-level summary without the behavioral or parameter details needed. It is not verbose but lacks substance, balancing at a 'minimum viable' level.

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 moderate complexity (2 parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description still leaves many gaps. It does not clarify what a 'BOM summary' includes (e.g., components, quantities, prices), how 'source' affects results, or how 'quantity' interacts with pricing. The output schema exists but the description should provide enough context for an agent to know when and why to call this tool. It does not.

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 the parameters. The two parameters 'source' and 'quantity' are not described at all. The mention of 'extended pricing' hints that quantity is used for cost multiplication, but this is not explicit, and 'source' remains completely unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema doc.

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 function: generating a BOM summary with unit and extended pricing. The verb 'Generate' and resource 'BOM summary' are specific, and it distinguishes itself from export_bom (which exports files) and variant_export_bom by focusing on a live summary with pricing. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other BOM-related tools like lib_check_stock_availability, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it retrieves live pricing from a source (jlcsearch) or that it is appropriate for cost estimation rather than export. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, leaving the agent without clear direction on tool selection.

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