Read resale prices

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description earns credit by adding the authorization model (owner-only, unscoped key) and the shape of the payload ('enabled and multipliers per resource: cpu, memory, storage (volumes), egress, objectStorage, sandbox'), which is valuable given no output schema. It stops short of saying what an unauthorized call returns.

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?

One dense sentence with the action and the access constraint front-loaded, followed by the field enumeration. Efficient, though the parentheticals ('as multiples of Lizard's', '(volumes)') make it slightly packed.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned and who may call it. The only gap is failure behavior for non-owner or scoped keys, which a caller would want before invoking.

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 coverage is 100% and the single workspaceId param is already documented in-schema with a pointer to workspace_list. The description adds nothing about parameters, which is acceptable at this coverage level but no better than baseline.

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?

States a specific verb ('Read') plus the exact resource ('the prices a workspace's scoped API keys are shown, as multiples of Lizard's') and enumerates the returned fields. This is unambiguously distinct from the sibling workspace_resale_pricing_set and from workspace_limits_get.

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?

Gives a clear precondition for use: 'owner only, with a key that has no scopes'. It does not explicitly name the write counterpart or state what to do when the caller lacks owner rights, so the routing guidance is strong but not complete.

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