Get Pricelist

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Fetch' without elaborating on the response format, error behaviors, or side effects. It does not specify whether the operation is strictly read-only or what happens if the named pricelist does not exist.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, containing no filler words. It effectively communicates the core purpose in minimal space.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too sparse to be fully self-contained. It leaves gaps about the structure of the returned pricelist, potential errors, and whether any prerequisites exist, making it only minimally adequate for a simple 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?

The schema only defines a 'pricelist' string with no description, and the description adds that it is a 'named/specific' identifier with an example ('reseller pricelist'). This clarifies the parameter's semantic role, but it does not specify accepted formats or constraints beyond the type, so compensation for the 0% schema coverage is only partial.

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 action ('Fetch') and resource (a 'named/specific pricelist'), providing enough scope to distinguish it from a generic list-all tool like 'pricelist'. The example 'reseller pricelist' adds useful context about the kind of pricelist targeted.

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 when you have a specific pricelist name, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as 'pricelist' or mention when not to use it. There are no explicit exclusions or alternative recommendations, so guidance is only implicit.

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