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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates a read-only operation ('List'), but does not disclose authentication needs, return format, or side effects. For a zero-parameter list tool, this is minimally adequate but lacks depth.

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 sentence with 12 words, front-loading the key action and resource. Every phrase earns its place, with no fluff.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about the return structure or prerequisites. It only describes what is listed, not how the listing is presented (e.g., fields, pagination, or data source).

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the description need not add param info. However, it adds meaning by specifying the content (on-chain, paid in ETH, no Stripe), which goes beyond the schema. Baseline for 0 params 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 states the verb ('List') and resource ('AATOS on-chain subscription tiers'), and adds distinguishing context ('paid in ETH to treasury. No Stripe.'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like stocktoken_subscription_status or stocktoken_subscribe_plan.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The sibling list is large and includes many related tools, so a phrase like 'Use to view available tiers before subscribing' would help, but it's missing.

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