get_price_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that prices exclude Danish taxes, tariffs, and transport costs, and notes the data source (Nord Pool). However, it does not state that the tool is read-only or mention any other behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, destructive actions). The important caveat is covered.

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 (two sentences plus an important note), front-loaded with purpose, and has no fluff. Every sentence adds value: what it does, use case, and critical caveat.

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 explains what summary metrics are returned. It covers the key nuance about price exclusivity. For a simple tool with 2 parameters, it is fairly complete, though could optionally mention response 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the 'area' and 'date' parameters. It mentions defaults briefly but repeats schema info.

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 fetches a summary of electricity spot prices, listing exact metrics (min, max, average, cheapest hour, most expensive hour). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_cheapest_hours or get_prices by being a concise summary, not a list or single value.

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 says 'Good for a concise one-line briefing,' indicating appropriate use. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context of siblings provides implicit guidance. A clear usage context is provided.

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