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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses the behavior of omitting place_slug, specifies the return fields (name, description, price, billing cycle, perks, checkout URL), and implies a non-mutating read operation. It could add an explicit read-only or auth note, but the transparency is strong.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then usage guidance, then return values. No unnecessary words or repetition; every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers usage, the meaning of the parameter, and the return fields. It also places the tool in context relative to search_places, making it self-contained.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds value beyond the schema by labeling place_slug as 'Strongly recommended' and explaining the consequence of omission. This enriches the parameter's semantics beyond the raw schema description.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List membership or subscription plans (Wix Pricing Plans).' It immediately distinguishes venue-specific plans from directory site plans, aligning with sibling tools like list_products and list_offers but with a unique scope.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: use place_slug from search_places for a specific venue's plans, and omit it only if the directory's own plans are intended (which 'most sites do not have'). This contrasts with alternative usage and recommends the common case.

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