estimate_unit_economics

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

No annotations provided, so description holds the burden. It describes the estimation behavior and input format but does not state side effects (e.g., read-only, no modifications). As an estimation tool, likely idempotent, but not explicitly disclosed.

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?

Description is concise: a clear purpose sentence followed by parameter definitions. No redundant information, well-structured with Args section.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, and presence of output schema, description adequately covers input semantics and cross-references estimate_bom. It does not describe return values, but output schema likely handles that. Slight gap in not explaining output format.

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 0%, but description adds meaning: clarifies items format (PricingSpec dicts with quantity), units_per_month as monthly volume, unit_label with default 'user' and examples. This compensates well for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'estimate' and resource 'per-unit economics', with specific examples (cost per user/request/transaction). It implies differentiation from sibling estimate_bom but does not explicitly contrast.

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?

Description indicates when to use: for per-unit cost estimation given BOM and volume. It references estimate_bom for item format but does not explain when not to use this tool versus alternatives like estimate_bom or get_price.

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