Get Pricing

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description correctly does not repeat those. It adds useful behavioral context about the output containing per-resource hourly rates and volume pricing tiers, which is the key information an agent needs before invoking.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the operation and its scope. Every word earns its place, with no redundant restatement of the title or filler content.

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 parameterless, read-only pricing lookup, the description is complete: it identifies the data domain and the granularity of the returned information. With annotations covering safety and open-world output, there is no additional context an agent clearly needs to select or invoke this tool correctly.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 applies because nothing is missing.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a unique resource ('pricing'), and the exact scope ('per-resource hourly rates and volume pricing tiers'). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools, which all target different resources like cubes, domains, snapshots, or TCP mappings.

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 conveys a clear use case—fetching pricing information—and no sibling tool overlaps with pricing, so there is no alternative to exclude. It does not explicitly say 'when not to use,' but the naming and scope leave little ambiguity.

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