createContractPhasePricing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It discloses it's a write operation ('add pricing') but does not mention side effects, error conditions, authorization requirements, or return value. The mutual exclusivity rule is more about parameter semantics than behavior.

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, front-loaded with the action. The second sentence is somewhat long but packs essential constraints. Could be slightly more concise, but overall efficient.

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?

The description covers the core mutual exclusivity but omits context for other required parameters (contractId, phaseId) and optional parameters like start_date, end_date, etc. Given the complexity (14 params, nested objects, no output schema), it could be more complete in explaining how all pieces fit together.

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 already has 100% description coverage for all parameters. The description adds value by clarifying the mutual exclusivity between pricing_id and pricing, and the pairing with product_id/product, which is not conveyed purely by the 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?

The description clearly states 'Add pricing to a contract phase' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool from siblings by focusing on contract phase pricing, and includes key usage constraints like 'pass EXACTLY ONE of pricing_id or pricing'.

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 states that exactly one of pricing_id or pricing must be provided, and that it should be paired with product_id or product. However, it does not provide guidance on when to choose one option over the other or compare with sibling tools.

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