Estimate order costs

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description reinforces it with 'Nothing is charged' and 'without creating an order', which is exactly the reassurance an agent needs before a cost-preview. It doesn't mention latency, external lookup behavior, or rate limits, which the openWorldHint implies but does not explain.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what it computes, then the workflow placement, then the safety statement. No filler and nothing redundant.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description never indicates what the estimate returns (cost breakdown per item, totals, currency) or that some params only affect certain cost components. For a nested-object tool with 50% schema coverage and no return-value documentation, the description leaves real gaps, though the core intent is clear.

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 only 50% and the description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond echoing the cost categories (shipping, tax, print) that correspond to the schema fields. It never mentions that `recipient` is required for meaningful shipping/tax estimates or that `shipping` must come from get_shipping_rates — the single most consequential parameter detail for this tool.

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?

Names a specific verb (Estimate) and the exact resource components it prices out: item, print, shipping, and tax costs. It immediately disambiguates from create_order by stating 'without creating an order', so an agent can distinguish a dry-run pricing tool from a real order tool in one read.

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?

'Call this before create_order' gives an explicit sequencing rule and names the relevant sibling. It stops short of stating when alternatives apply (e.g., that get_shipping_rates must be consulted to pick a non-default shipping method), so it is clear context without full exclusion guidance.

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