cost_analyze_infra

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclosure behavioral traits. It only says 'Analysis' and does not state whether the operation is read-only, whether it makes external pricing API calls, whether cloud credentials are needed, or what side effects may occur. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler words. The main action and purpose are front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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?

Without output schema or annotations, the description does not explain return format, output contents, prerequisites, or required authentication. For a tool with three parameters and a provider enum, this is not enough context for an agent to fully understand invocation expectations or distinguish it from related cost tools.

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?

Three parameters exist with 67% schema description coverage. The schema already documents directory and provider, but api_key is undocumented in both schema and description. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond matching 'infrastructure-as-code files' to the directory 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?

The description names a specific verb ('Analyze') and a clear resource ('infrastructure-as-code files'), with the outcome being cost estimation and savings identification. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like cost_optimize_docker or cost_generate_report, which may overlap in purpose.

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 from 'Analysis infrastructure-as-code files' but gives no explicit context about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as cost_optimize_docker, cost_optimize_database, or iac_scan_terraform. There is no when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives.

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