Fetch a specific price by ID to get amount, currency, and billing interval. Use this tool to look up exact pricing data for a product variant.
Get a specific price by ID, including amount, currency, and billing interval.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| include | No | Comma-separated related resources to include (e.g. 'variant') | |
| priceId | Yes | The price ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.10.10Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds context about returned fields (amount, currency, billing interval), which is helpful. No contradiction. Could mention authentication or error handling, but not necessary given 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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Efficiently communicates key information.
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 simple read tool with two parameters and good annotations, the description is mostly complete. It lists the fields returned, which is helpful given no output schema. Could mention that it requires a valid price ID, but overall adequate.
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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 verb 'Get', the resource 'specific price by ID', and what is returned ('amount, currency, billing interval'). This distinguishes it from the sibling `ls_list_prices` which returns multiple prices.
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 by ID, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like `ls_list_prices`. No 'when not to use' or alternative references are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.