get_pricing
Read-onlyIdempotent
Pricing tiers at The Balanced Investor Club — what each one unlocks. No sales pitch.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
welcome
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds the behavioral note 'No sales pitch,' which is a tone/approach disclosure. It does not detail return format or pagination, but given the simplicity and the annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence, immediately states the subject and value, and ends with a clear behavioral qualifier. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness4/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema and no parameters, the description is the sole source of information about what the tool returns. It adequately explains the content ('pricing tiers' and what they 'unlock') but lacks explicit details about the format (e.g., list, object) or granularity. However, for a simple informational tool, this is nearly complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is given for 0 params, and the description does not add anything misleading or unnecessary.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool provides 'Pricing tiers at The Balanced Investor Club — what each one unlocks.' The verb is implied by the name and the description is specific about the resource (pricing tiers) and purpose, distinguishing it from all sibling tools which focus on market data, watchlists, trades, etc.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
While there are no explicit exclusions or named alternatives, the description provides clear context: this is the tool to learn about pricing tiers and their benefits. The phrase 'No sales pitch' implies this is an informational resource, not a promotional one, subtly guiding when to use it. Since no sibling tool covers pricing, the context is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.