Get data transfer costs

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the tool surfaces specific types of data transfer charges and includes cost-reduction recommendations, providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 concise: a brief introductory paragraph, bullet-like args, and examples. Information is front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value.

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?

Given no output schema, the description hints at the output structure (findings with recommendations) but lacks details on fields, units, or granularity. It adequately covers purpose and parameters, but could be more complete about the return format.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries full burden. It clearly explains each parameter: dates are ISO format with defaults, threshold_usd filters results. Examples further illustrate usage, fully compensating for lack of schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states the tool identifies significant data transfer cost line items from AWS Cost Explorer, listing specific cost types (internet egress, cross-AZ, inter-region, NAT Gateway). This clearly differentiates from sibling tools that focus on other cost aspects.

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 provides example queries that suggest usage context, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. The examples imply typical use cases, but guidance lacks directiveness.

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