Scowty plans and pricing
get_plans_and_pricingReturns Scowty's current products and prices with a link to the pricing page. Read-only.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
get_plans_and_pricingReturns Scowty's current products and prices with a link to the pricing page. Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description repeats 'Read-only' and adds that a pricing-page link is returned, but it does not add details such as authentication, rate limits, or response shape.
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 and front-loads the key return information. There is no redundant or wasted language beyond the minor repetition of the read-only annotation.
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 lookup tool, the description is nearly complete: it names the returned data and the pricing-page link. Because there is no output schema, it could have specified the response structure a bit more, but the complexity is low enough that this is a minor gap.
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 parameter semantics are inherently simple. With no parameters to document, the baseline is 4 and the description does not need to compensate for missing schema details.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: it returns Scowty's current products, prices, and a pricing-page link. The purpose is clear and distinct from the sibling preview and AI-visibility tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from them.
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?
Usage is implied by the resource being returned: an agent should call this when it needs current plans and pricing. The description provides no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool guidance.
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.