linode_estimate_cost

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint: true, and the description confirms it is an estimation tool (read operation). It goes beyond annotations by detailing that it returns itemized lines with source labels, assumptions applied, and free allotments applied before overage. No contradictions.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and structured efficiently. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the tool has an output schema (implied) and moderate complexity, the description covers the key aspects: what it estimates, what components to include, and the nature of the output. It does not mention the region parameter or provide exhaustive detail, but it is sufficient for an AI agent to understand the tool's capability.

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%, so the description bears the burden. It partially compensates by listing the major components (instances, volumes, NodeBalancers, LKE tier, Object Storage) but does not explain all parameters like region, extra_egress_gb, or default values. The description adds meaning beyond the schema but is incomplete for all nested parameters.

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 estimates hourly and monthly cost of a composite stack, listing specific components like instances, volumes, NodeBalancers, LKE tier, and Object Storage. It distinguishes itself from siblings like linode_get_pricing by focusing on estimation of combined resources.

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 provides a clear usage context: it estimates cost for a described stack. It also gives a specific guideline: LKE worker nodes should be added under instances. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to alternative tools like linode_get_pricing.

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