dealdesk.render_quote_totals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully notes the host requirement (MCP Apps hosts / ChatGPT) and that get_quote returns JSON only, but omits what happens on non-supporting hosts, auth needs, or fallback behavior.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action, and each sentence carries distinct information (what it does, when to call, alternative). No filler or redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-format explanation isn't needed, and the host requirement plus usage routing give decent coverage. However, the undocumented quoteId and unstated fallback/error behavior leave an agent with gaps for a rendering 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?

Schema coverage is only 50%: projectId is documented, but quoteId has no schema description, and the tool description adds no parameter meaning at all. The description fails to compensate for the undocumented required quoteId parameter.

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+resource ('Show the DealDesk quote-totals widget') and distinguishes itself from the JSON sibling get_quote. It's clear this renders a UI widget rather than returning data, though it doesn't differentiate from the related render_quote_pdf sibling.

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?

Explicitly states when to call it ('when the user should see quote totals UI') and names the alternative (get_quote returns JSON only). Lacks an explicit when-not-to-use clause, but the routing condition is clear enough for selection.

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