get_onboarding_plan_optionsGet complete live Pro and Platinum benefits, prices, billing cycles, fees, trials, and discounts. Display only PRO and PLATINUM monthly or yearly options, ask the user to select a plan type and period, and carry the returned priceId unchanged.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| discountCode | No | ||
| referralCode | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation, and the description aligns by stating 'Get complete live ...'. It adds behavioral context by listing the returned data (benefits, prices, billing cycles, fees, trials, discounts) and instructing how to handle the priceId. No contradiction with annotations.
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 with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core function, and the second provides actionable usage guidance. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.
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 read-only tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the output content and usage flow. It mentions 'returned priceId', hinting at response structure. However, it could be more complete by describing the response format or providing examples.
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?
Input schema has 2 optional parameters (discountCode, referralCode) with 0% schema coverage. The description does not explain these parameters at all, leaving the agent to guess their purpose. This is a significant failure to add value beyond the schema.
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 it gets live Pro and Platinum benefits, prices, billing cycles, fees, trials, and discounts. It specifies the verb 'Get' and the resource 'onboarding plan options'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_plan_info or get_plan_prices, missing a clear distinction.
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 provides a workflow: display only PRO and PLATINUM monthly or yearly options, ask user to select, and carry priceId unchanged. This gives clear usage context. However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or suggest alternative tools for other plan types or actions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools are semantically identical, distinguished only by 'business' vs 'community' prefixes, and descriptions explicitly state they are interchangeable. This creates ambiguity for agent selection. Examples include add_business_admins/add_community_admins and get_business/get_community.
Tools generally follow a verb_noun pattern, but the inconsistent use of 'business' vs 'community' for the same entities breaks the pattern. While individual naming is clear, the overall set lacks uniformity.
With 423 tools, the server is massively over-scoped. The high count is driven by redundant 'business' and 'community' variants and many niche operations. A more focused surface would be far more manageable.
The tool set covers a broad range of features including CRUD operations for multiple product types, analytics, payments, messaging, and integrations. Minor gaps exist (e.g., missing update for some entity types), but overall domain coverage is strong.