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

The annotations already declare this is a read-only, closed-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope by saying it covers every payment type, but does not add details about authentication, rate limits, or response 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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the scope and content directly.

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 zero-parameter, read-only pricing lookup with no output schema, stating that it returns fees and limits for every payment type is nearly sufficient. The main missing context is how it relates to get_spend_limit, but the tool is otherwise complete enough to call.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics that the description needs to compensate for. The baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 identifies the resource as fees and limits across every payment type, which tells an agent what data the tool returns. It does not explicitly differentiate from the related sibling get_spend_limit, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_spend_limit. The intended use is only implied by the phrase 'fees and limits for every payment type.'

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