Azure VM price changes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description usefully adds the fixed 24-region scope and the report's content categories, but says nothing about data freshness, coverage limits, or latency for a report spanning up to 12 weeks.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that enumerates the report's contents with no filler or repetition. Nothing could be removed without losing 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?

For a one-optional-param read tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what the report returns (new sizes, retired sizes, price moves). It could say slightly more about the returned structure or region coverage granularity, but nothing essential 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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents 'weeks' including its default and max. The description adds no semantics beyond it, which matches the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

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?

Specific verb+resource: a weekly report of new/retired VM sizes and list-price moves across 24 regions. It clearly differs in substance from siblings like find_vm_sizes and estimate_vm_cost, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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 phrase 'Weekly report' implies the use case (tracking changes over time) but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to a sibling tool. Usage is inferred rather than stated.

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