check_pricing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool's function (lookup) without disclosing traits like read-only nature, idempotency, rate limits, or auth requirements. The read-only behavior is implied but not explicit.

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, short sentence that is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. Every part earns its place, making it highly concise.

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?

Given the tool has two optional parameters with enums and no output schema, the description is adequate but not rich. It identifies the model line but does not clarify return format, pricing units, or example usage. The simplicity of the tool partially compensates for the lack of detail.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for both parameters (model and action) with descriptions and enums. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage. However, it does not elaborate on parameter interactions or defaults.

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 'Look up' and the resource 'RunAPI pricing for the veo-3-1 model line'. It distinguishes the tool from sibling video operation tools (extend_video, get_task, text_to_video, upscale_video) by focusing solely on pricing queries.

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 implies usage for pricing lookups but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives or context for choosing this tool over siblings, though the purpose is clear.

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