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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add the useful detail that the data is fetched 'live from the pricing source of truth,' indicating it is not cached and reflects current pricing. The verb 'Get' implies a non-mutating read operation, which is adequately transparent for a simple no-parameter tool.

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 short sentences with no filler. The core action and resource are front-loaded, and the usage hint is given in a single clear clause. Every word earns its place.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description is fully complete. It states what it does, the source, and the exact use case. Sibling tools are clearly different, and nothing an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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 has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100% and there is nothing to document. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter semantics. It correctly omits any irrelevant parameter references.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('Lead Friendly's current subscription plans and prices'), and adds the key qualifier that it is 'live from the pricing source of truth.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like book_demo or create_lead, which are unrelated actions.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent when to use it: 'Use to answer "how much does Lead Friendly cost."' This is a direct, actionable trigger. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but given the sibling set and the tool's purpose, the guidance is unambiguous and sufficient.

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