set_cost_floor

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

The description explains the tool writes data (consistent with readOnlyHint=false) and describes the return behavior (confirmation echoes product details). It also clarifies the effect of setting cost to 0.

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 a single paragraph that efficiently conveys purpose, usage examples, and constraints. Slightly more structure (e.g., separate sentences for behavior) could improve clarity, but it's concise and informative.

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?

The description covers purpose, when to use, behavior, and return details. Although there is no output schema, the description mentions what the confirmation echoes, making it fairly complete for a 3-parameter tool.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions. The description adds context: 'landed unit cost', 'marketplace currency', and ties parameters to the use case. Adds value beyond schema.

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 the tool records the user's cost basis for an ASIN for later use in flagging buy box drops and computing net spread. It uses specific verbs and resource, and is distinct from sibling tools.

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 explicit natural-language triggers ('my cost on B0... is $12') and constraints ('one ASIN per call', 'pass cost 0 to clear'). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives but is sufficient.

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