search_skus

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses sorting ('cheapest first'), return contents, billing-mode units, and query matching semantics, but it omits limit/pagination behavior, permissions, and whether limits are enforced on the result set.

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 appropriately short and front-loaded: purpose and sort order first, then parameter and return-value clarifications. Every sentence adds useful information without repetition.

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 description covers the basic search contract and return shape, which is helpful because there is no output schema. However, for a 7-parameter tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, it does not fully document the filtering and limiting parameters.

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 must compensate. It explains `region` friendly names, `query` all-terms matching, and implies `service`, but it leaves `limit`, `min_vcpus`, `min_memory_gb`, and the `billing` filter unexplained.

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: search the official price list of a service in a region, sorted cheapest first. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as read_price_list, compare_modes, or compare_regions.

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 gives context for what is being searched but does not state when to use this tool instead of alternatives. There are no named alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites to guide tool selection.

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