Check Service Price

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, fully conveying the safe, non-destructive nature. The description adds no new behavioral traits beyond reinforcing that it checks price/availability. No contradiction exists.

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 two sentences with zero wasted words. It front-loads the action and necessary context, making it easy to parse quickly. Every sentence provides value.

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 simple price-check tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose but lacks detail about the return format (e.g., price, currency, availability status). Given the low complexity, it is adequate but could benefit from stating what the output contains.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions (service code string, country ISO code) that are clear and sufficient. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score applies.

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 clearly states the action 'Check the price and availability for a specific service + country combination.' It uses a specific verb 'check' and distinct resource (price/availability), differentiating it from siblings like get_balance or get_order. The additional guidance to 'always check price before buying' reinforces its purpose.

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 explicitly advises to use this tool before buying, giving clear context for when to invoke it. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, though siblings like virtualsms_find_cheapest may serve a different purpose. The guidance is straightforward and helpful.

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