vf_get_pricing
Return current VoiceFlip agentic pricing: PAYG per-conversation rates, monthly agentic plan, and wholesale default discount.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| currency | No | usd |
VoiceFlip
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It states that the tool returns pricing and lists the components, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose whether the pricing is fetched live, cached, or whether any side effects occur, nor does it mention how invalid currencies are handled.
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, succinct sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Return current VoiceFlip agentic pricing') and then provides specific detail. There is no wasted wording or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is simple, and the description lists the components of the returned pricing. However, it omits any reference to the currency parameter, which is the only input, leaving the agent to infer how the parameter affects the result. Without an output schema, this omission is notable.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The only parameter, 'currency', is not mentioned in the description at all, despite having low schema coverage (0%). The schema defines the enum and default, but the description fails to explain that the currency parameter determines which currency the pricing is returned in, or that it defaults to USD. This leaves a significant gap in understanding.
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 uses the specific verb 'Return' and names the exact resource ('current VoiceFlip agentic pricing'), then enumerates what's included (PAYG per-conversation rates, monthly agentic plan, wholesale default discount). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like signup and health.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies this tool is used when you need current pricing information, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. There are no sibling tools for pricing, so the context is somewhat clear, but guidance on preconditions or currency-specific use is absent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool serves a clearly distinct purpose: vf_signup starts the signup process, vf_complete_signup finishes it, vf_get_pricing provides pricing information, and vf_health checks server status. There is no overlap in their functionality, so an agent can easily choose the right tool.
Naming Consistency4/5
All tools share the 'vf_' prefix, and most follow a verb_noun pattern (complete_signup, get_pricing). However, 'health' and 'signup' are one-word names that break the pattern slightly, though they remain clear and consistent in style.
Tool Count5/5
With only 4 tools, the server is tightly scoped to its purpose of managing signup and pricing. This is an appropriate size—not too thin, not overloaded.
Completeness4/5
The tool set covers the core signup lifecycle (initiate, complete) and essential informational endpoints (pricing, health). A minor gap is the lack of a way to retrieve account status or cancel a signup, but for the apparent scope this is sufficient and workable.