wafle_pricing_compute_preview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds that it returns 'base price, applied rules, final price', which is useful behavioral context given no output schema. It also reinforces non-destructive behavior in operational terms ('without disturbing the live cart').

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 sentences, with the action and inputs front-loaded. The second sentence provides practical usage context. No filler or redundant information.

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 simple parameters, strong annotations, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, inputs, outputs, and use case adequately. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 50%, with slug described but items not. The description clarifies items as 'a list of (sku, qty) pairs', adding meaning beyond the schema. It does not fully explain qty constraints, but the schema still provides defaults and bounds.

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 uses a specific verb ('Compute') and resource ('final price of a list of (sku, qty) pairs'), clearly distinguishing it from pricing rules management siblings. It also states the role as a preview/sanity check tool.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use as a sanity check before publishing pricing changes' and notes it 'answers how much would I be charging? without disturbing the live cart', which gives both a clear use case and an exclusion (not for live operations).

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