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

The description describes a read-only lookup, yet annotations declare readOnlyHint: false, creating a contradiction. The description does not clarify whether side effects exist (e.g., logging, state changes) nor does it address the discrepancy. Beyond annotations, it adds context about not exposing secrets but fails to resolve the contradiction.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and behavior. The execution guidance is somewhat generic and could be separated, but it does not waste words. Overall concise and well-organized for a single-parameter tool.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, output schema present), the description covers all necessary aspects: behavior with and without parameter, what it does not expose, and execution constraints. The sibling tools are numerous, but the description clearly differentiates this tool's role.

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 100% and description adds meaning to the optional sessionId parameter: when omitted, the tool lists recent session plans. This provides clear usage context beyond the schema description. The execution guidance also hints at keeping calls small, which is relevant.

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 tool performs a status lookup for premium sessions, returning planning status for a given session ID or listing recent plans when no ID is provided. It distinguishes itself from related tools like sap_premium_session_start and sap_premium_webhook_status by specifying the action and resource.

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 indicates when to use (free, no payment needed) and what not to expect (no secrets or stream payload). The execution guidance covers pricing and routing, but it does not explicitly exclude scenarios where alternatives should be used. However, the behavior is clear enough for basic usage decisions.

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