list-token-pricing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: the GET endpoint signals a safe read, and it discloses the exact return shape {items: [{id, cost}]}. It stops short of mentioning auth requirements or whether the table is cached/stale, so it earns a 4 rather than 5.

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 purpose, with no filler. The 'Wraps `syntx.tokensPricing.list`' clause is internal implementation detail that adds little for an agent, a minor deduction.

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?

For a zero-param read tool with no output schema, the description supplies endpoint, return structure, and resource scope, which is nearly everything needed to call it correctly. Only the sibling-routing guidance is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the return-shape hint adds a little value without needing parameter detail.

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 names a specific resource ('per-model token cost table') and the backing endpoint, so the agent knows exactly what data comes back. It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like list-models or get-tokens-history, but the resource is distinct enough to be told apart.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for pricing lookups, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of alternatives such as get-tokens-history or list-tariffs, and no prerequisites noted.

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