set_app_price

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the behavior of creating a price schedule with 'USA base, auto-equalized', but does not state whether it overwrites an existing schedule, idempotency, or any permissions needed. Some useful context is given, but important side-effect details are missing for a mutation tool.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and object. Every word adds value: method, requirement, and feature flag. No wasted text.

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 is simple (2 params, no output schema), and the description covers purpose, mechanism, requirement, and pro limitation. The only noticeable gap is the lack of explicit statement about overwriting existing price schedules, but overall it is complete for its complexity.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description's note 'price_usd: 0 for free' repeats the schema, but 'USA base' adds minor context beyond the schema's 'USA price tier'. It does not add substantial new meaning.

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 verb 'Set' and the resource 'app's base price', and adds the mechanism 'by creating its price schedule (USA base, auto-equalized)'. This is specific and distinguishes it from any sibling tool despite no direct pricing sibling.

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 explicitly states 'Required before submission', giving a clear when-to-use context. It also flags it as a 'Pro feature', implying an audience restriction. However, it does not mention any alternatives or exclusions, but no alternatives exist among siblings, so this is strong.

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