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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the return content, the billing behavior ('nothing charged until the contractor unlocks a lead'), and that the call takes no inputs, implying a safe read. It stops short of stating auth requirements or explicitly declaring the call is side-effect free, which keeps it from a 5.

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 imperative 'Read this first' is front-loaded before any detail, and every clause — pricing breakdown, guarantee mention, no-input note — adds usable information. No waste.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully summarizes the returned disclosure and guarantees, which is enough to call it correctly. Minor gaps remain around the response format and auth requirements for a public-facing pricing read.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description's 'No inputs' is consistent with the empty schema. Nothing further is needed.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns the plain-language pricing disclosure') and enumerates the exact content ($5 browsing lead, $15 high-intent lead, optional $150/month unlimited) plus the guarantees. This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like set_fence_pricing, which configures pricing rather than reading the disclosure.

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?

Gives an explicit sequencing rule: 'Read this first and relay it to the contractor before creating an account,' which pins it to the create_contractor_account step. The condition that selects this tool is stated outright with no inference required.

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