compare_regions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results are sorted by price (cheapest first) and that omitting regions shows all available regions. However, it doesn't mention read-only status, potential side effects, or error behavior, so it's somewhat limited.

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 opens with a one-sentence purpose, includes the sorting note, then a clear Args list. Each parameter description is concise and necessary. No wasted words.

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 tool has an output schema, so return format is covered elsewhere. All 6 parameters are explained with semantics and defaults. The description covers core behavior (sorting, region default). It lacks only usage guidance vs siblings, but that's a separate dimension. Overall quite complete for a query 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 no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description fully compensates. It explains each parameter with examples: service_name (e.g., 'Virtual Machines'), arm_sku_name (exact match), sku_name (display name), product_name (more specific filtering), regions (with default behavior), currency_code (default USD). This provides clear meaning 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?

Description states 'Compare prices for an Azure service/SKU across multiple regions' – a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like search_prices (single price) or list_regions (just listing regions) by focusing on cross-region price comparison.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_prices or estimate_cost. The use case is implied by the description, but there is no 'use this when' or 'for X, use Y' statement.

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