calculate_storage_cost

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to cover these. However, the description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., that this is a simple calculator, no side effects). It is adequate but does not provide extra value beyond the 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 extremely concise but at the expense of effectiveness. While it avoids unnecessary words, it lacks enough substance to be helpful. It is minimally viable but not well-structured or informative.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is far from complete. It does not specify the output format, units, or any cost calculation nuances (e.g., pricing per hour versus per month). The tool handle is clear, but the description fails to equip the agent for correct invocation.

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%, meaning no parameter descriptions are provided in the schema. The description does not explain any parameters, such as units for GB values, tiers meanings, or any constraints. For a cost calculator, this is a critical gap that the description should fill, but it does not.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('storage cost'), and it is distinguishable from siblings like calculate_database_cost or calculate_kubernetes_cost. However, it does not explicitly mention the storage types (block, object, file) which are present in the schema, so it is not fully explicit.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., calculate_database_cost, calculate_networking_cost). There is no mention of prerequisites, alternative tools, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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