Azure Cost Dimensions

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

No annotations are provided, but the description's verb 'Lists' clearly indicates a read-only operation. It adds practical context about discovering tag keys for WAF analysis. Since it is a simple list operation, this level of transparency is adequate, though it stops short of stating permission needs or pagination 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?

Two sentences, both information-dense. The first states the core functionality, the second provides cross-tool usage guidance and a WAF tip. No filler or 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 tool has only one parameter, no output schema, and low complexity. The description adequately covers what it does, how it relates to azure_cost_query, and a practical use case. It is complete for an AI agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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%, with a detailed explanation of the scope parameter. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics, which is acceptable given the schema already covers it.

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 identifies the tool's action ('Lists available dimensions') and resource ('cost grouping and filtering at a given scope'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling azure_cost_query by noting it provides valid values for the groupBy parameter.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool: 'Use this to discover valid values for the groupBy parameter in azure_cost_query.' It also includes a WAF tip for chargeback/showback analysis. However, it does not mention when not to use it or present alternative tools.

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