View rate table & learning loop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It suggests a read-only operation ('Show the live rate table') but does not explicitly confirm that no modifications occur, nor does it disclose any side effects, permissions, or rate limits.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the main action and lists components clearly.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient information about what the tool returns and its purpose. It covers the key components of the rate table.

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% (the only parameter 'surface' has a description explaining it shows the learned rate for a specific surface). The description adds context about the overall table but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema for the parameter.

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 it shows the live rate table including base market rates, learned effective rates, access factors, and mobilization fee. It uses specific verb 'Show' and resource 'live rate table', and implies it is the quoting engine's brain, distinguishing it from sibling tools like quote_price or pricing_record_outcome.

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 implies this tool is fundamental ('the quoting engine's brain') but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios.

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