calculate_unit_price

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

No annotations are provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the computation, such as whether it is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. Since annotations are absent, the description carries the burden but is minimal.

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 very concise: three sentences that front-load the purpose, then use context, inputs, and a related tool reference. No wasted words.

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's simplicity (single parameter with full schema, output schema exists), the description adequately covers the purpose and inputs. It also mentions the output (price per unit and best buy) and a related tool. However, it lacks behavioral details that could be added.

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 schema covers the parameter 'items' with a description, and the description lists the input fields. However, it adds little extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. With 100% schema description coverage, the default is 3.

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 states it compares unit prices across packages to find the best deal, which is clear and specific. It distinguishes itself among many sibling calculators by its shopping focus, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar calculators.

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 says 'Use for shopping' providing context, but does not give explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives or when not to use. It mentions list_bundles for related calculators, which is helpful but limited.

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