Resource Price Table

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: the per-day pricing rule for durations ≥1 day with a worked example ('30d' at 40 SUN = 40 x 30 per unit). 'Public, read-only' partly restates the annotations, which keeps it from a 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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then the matrix semantics, then the pricing caveat, then the alternative-tool routing. No filler sentences; every clause carries information an agent needs.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description adds the interpretive key (matrix indexing and per-day pricing) that the schema alone may not make obvious. Combined with the routing guidance and read-only note, an agent has everything needed to select and call it 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 coverage is only 50%, so the description must compensate: it conveys that the tool takes a resource type (ENERGY or BANDWIDTH) and clarifies how pricing scales with amounts and durations, which is the core semantic of the output params. The optional `address` parameter is left entirely to the schema, a small residual gap.

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?

States a specific verb (read) and resource (price grid) scoped to ENERGY/BANDWIDTH, and explains the matrix shape `prices[i][j]` in terms of amounts and durations. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling quote tool by being a comparison grid rather than an exact estimate.

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 to use this to compare cost across amounts and durations in one call, and names `tronsave_estimate_buy_resource` as the alternative for an exact quote. This gives both the when-to-use and the when-to-use-something-else.

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