WB: get prices

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the tool is read-only and never changes prices, which is important safety-relevant context. It also discloses that money values are decimal strings with a currency rather than floats, adding a concrete data-contract detail beyond the schema.

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 short sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by a behavioral guarantee, then a meaningful data-format note. Every sentence earns its place.

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 is a simple read-only list/get with three optional parameters, a fully documented schema, and an output schema present. The description covers what is returned, side-effect safety, and the money representation. An agent has enough context 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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond the schema; cursor, limit, and connection_id are already well documented. The money-value note is useful but applies to response data rather than parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and names a precise resource ('current Wildberries prices and discounts'), immediately distinguishing it from sibling tools like wb_products_list, wb_stocks_get, and price tools for other marketplaces. It also adds a behavioral distinction by stating it is read-only.

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 clearly establishes when to use the tool: when current Wildberries prices and discounts are needed. 'Read-only; never changes prices' is a useful explicit usage boundary. It does not name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the resource-specific wording makes the intended context clear.

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