Get upsell pricing

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds a behavioral nuance beyond annotations: the headline price is not necessarily what a buyer paid, which is critical for interpreting the returned data. This adds value and does not contradict any annotation.

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 zero waste. The core purpose is front-loaded immediately, and the caveat is placed second, providing essential context without clutter. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the tool's purpose and the critical caveat about actual cost. The origin of upsell_id is documented in the schema description, and annotations cover safety. There is no missing information that would prevent an agent from calling it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% – both account and upsell_id have detailed descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional parameter information, which is acceptable given the schema's completeness. The description implicitly relies on the schema for parameter details, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Get every price point configured on one upsell.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_upsell (which presumably returns upsell details) and other pricing tools (get_bump_pricing, get_downsell_pricing) by focusing on upsell price points. The added caveat about headline price vs. actual paid further clarifies its unique purpose.

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 gives implicit usage guidance: 'read this before quoting what it costs.' This implies it should be used when accurate cost information is needed. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as pointing out that get_upsell is for other upsell details or that get_product_pricing is for products. The guidance is clear for its intended use case but lacks explicit exclusions.

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