feegow_get_price

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits but only states the action. It does not mention that the tool is read-only (though HTTP GET suggests it), required authentication, error behavior (e.g., invalid ID), or any side effects. The minimal description lacks transparency.

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 at one sentence, with no fluff. However, it could be structured to separate the category from the action, and it omits useful details that would make it more valuable. It earns its conciseness but at the cost of completeness.

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 tool is simple with two parameters. But the description does not describe the return value, error handling, or authentication. For a price retrieval tool, an agent would need to know the expected output format or potential errors. The description is incomplete for making informed decisions.

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 description does not add meaning to the parameters beyond the input schema. The schema coverage is 50% (only 'query' has a description), and 'agendamento_id' is not explained in either schema or description. The description fails to clarify what 'agendamento_id' represents or how to use the optional 'query' object.

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 that the tool returns the price associated with an appointment, using a specific verb and resource. It includes a category '[Agendamentos]' and the HTTP endpoint, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like feegow_list_appointments or feegow_create_appointment that focus on other appointment operations.

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 alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or context such as requiring an appointment ID. It simply states the function without any contextual advice.

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