ncloud_get_price_list

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation, and the description aligns with this by using 'Get' and 'Retrieves'. The description adds useful context about the return content (pricing details including charging unit, rating unit, conditions, and promise discounts), but does not disclose potential limitations, pagination, or error behavior. This is acceptable for a simple read-only tool but not overly rich.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action ('Get price list by price numbers') and immediately followed by useful detail on what the response includes. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 readOnlyHint annotation, 100% schema parameter coverage, and no output schema, the description provides adequate context by listing what the response contains. It does not explain optional parameter usage (promiseNoList, payCurrencyCode) beyond the schema, but this is not a significant gap for a simple getter. The description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the 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 description coverage is 100% for all three parameters, so the schema already documents each parameter's meaning. The description mentions 'price numbers' and 'promise discounts', which maps loosely to priceNoList and promiseNoList, but adds no additional syntax, format, or constraint details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves a price list by price numbers and specifies the details included (charging unit, rating unit, conditions, promise discounts). This distinguishes it from generic product price list tools by focusing on price numbers as the key input, though it doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ncloud_get_product_price_list or ncloud_get_demand_cost_list. It implies usage context (looking up pricing plan details for specific price numbers) but offers no exclusions or comparison to other pricing-related tools.

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