calculate_workload_cost

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds value by specifying the included cost components. However, it lacks details on return format or potential constraints (e.g., missing data handling).

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?

Single sentence of 14 words, front-loading the core purpose without extraneous detail. Highly efficient for quick comprehension.

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?

Despite no output schema and low parameter coverage, the description omits important contextual details such as the need to provide compute and Kubernetes inputs for meaningful estimates, and fails to clarify return type (single number vs breakdown).

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 0%, but the description only repeats component names already evident in the schema. It does not provide additional meaning for individual parameters (e.g., units, ranges, or behavior when omitted).

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?

Description clearly states the tool estimates total monthly cost for a workload across all cloud providers, listing included components. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like compare_compute or estimate_migration_savings which focus on specific 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not specify context or exclusion conditions, leaving the agent to infer usage without explicit direction.

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