Convert Region Prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose the key behavioral trait: it returns Play's own recommended prices, not a naive FX conversion, and rounds values to local price conventions. It does not explicitly state 'no changes are made' or cover rate limits, but the 'Returns' framing makes the read-only nature reasonably clear.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler. The primary action is front-loaded and the important caveat about Play-recommended pricing is expressed immediately. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool has only three required parameters, all documented, and an output schema is present, so return values are covered elsewhere. The description is sufficient for invoking the tool correctly, though it could optionally mention unsupported currencies or clarify that existing prices are not modified.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add any parameter-level nuance beyond calling the input a 'source price,' so it provides no meaningful value beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Convert one source price into every Play region's price.' It also distinguishes the behavior from a naive FX conversion by clarifying that Play's recommended prices are returned, so an agent can clearly tell what the tool accomplishes.

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 the usage scenario: when you need regional prices from a single source price. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or how it compares to related sibling tools such as migrate_base_plan_prices, which also deals with region prices. The context is clear but excludes alternative guidance.

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