Estimate the cost

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is already covered. The description adds substantive behavioral context absent from the schema by enumerating the outputs (input/output tokens, cost per call or pass, batch discount, cheapest model, fine-tuning on rented GPU), which is valuable given there is no output 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?

A single dense sentence front-loads the core purpose and then lists the output dimensions. It is efficient, though the semicolon-separated clause about datasets and rented GPUs is slightly compressed and reads as a run-on.

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?

For a read-only, single-parameter cost estimator with no output schema, the description adequately describes what will be computed. It does not explain currency-per-model aggregation or the format of the returned estimate, but the essential scope is covered.

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% and the single 'code' parameter is documented as 'Short code or author/name'. The description does not clarify the identifier format or what resource types are accepted, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema — baseline 3 applies.

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 the cost of a ContexteTech resource across common AI models in euros, enumerating the cost dimensions returned. It is distinct from siblings like search_resources or download_dataset, though the framing is a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb+resource statement.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites (e.g., that a resource must first be located or loaded). Usage is only loosely implied by the phrase 'a ContexteTech resource'.

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