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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description says 'Create a Stripe Checkout URL' and describes the operation as creating a checkout artifact. This mirrors the create_record contradiction: an operation described as creating something cannot be read-only. The additional pricing guidance and 'Does not take card data' are useful but do not resolve the annotation conflict.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds pricing guardrails and return behavior. It repeats some price guidance already present in the schema, which is slightly redundant, but every sentence serves a real decision-making purpose.

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?

Covers the essential context: purpose, HTTP 402 trigger, acceptable prices, forbidden prices, return value, and the fact that card data is not collected. The output schema exists, so return-type detail is available separately. The main gap is the unresolved read-only annotation contradiction.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents path, source, and priceId. The description adds domain guidance on which priceId values are preferred or forbidden, but this largely repeats the schema's own parameter description rather than adding substantial new semantic meaning.

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 action ('Create a Stripe Checkout URL') and resource ('for a plan'). This clearly distinguishes it from the generate/quote/list siblings and makes the tool's role immediately understandable.

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?

Gives explicit triggering context ('After HTTP 402'), names the preferred price IDs, and explicitly forbids the Content Creator prices as wall or post-value offers. It also points to get_account.offerCheckout as the source of valid offers, which routes the agent to the correct supporting tool.

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