quote

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true; the description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: it is free, does not spend balance, the price is time-limited, and a usage-based maximum reservation may apply. It does not clarify whether the reservation actually holds funds or how long the expiry window is.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the cost fact ('Free.') an agent needs first. The approval instruction is compressed into a slightly dense clause but nothing is redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully names what comes back (price, expiry, usage-based maximum reservation) and the required human-approval gate. Remaining gap is the reservation semantics and whether the quote holds funds, which matters for a non-readOnly tool with openWorldHint=true.

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 schema already spells out 'exact endpoint_id returned by search_models/get_model' and the provider-native input object. The description's 'exact model+input' only reinforces that constraint without adding format, size, or media-reference guidance beyond the 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?

States a specific verb+resource: get a time-limited USD price for an exact model+input. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling 'generate' by naming it as the downstream step, so an agent can tell pricing from execution without opening the schema.

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?

Clearly sets the workflow context: call this before generate, show the user the price/expiry/reservation, and get approval. There are no explicit exclusions (e.g. when a cached or existing quote should be reused instead of re-quoting), which keeps it just short of a 5.

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