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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. "List" implies a non-mutating read and the token constraint discloses an auth prerequisite, but it says nothing about pagination, whether the catalog is a fixed enumeration or tenant-specific, or error behavior for unregistered tokens.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler, and the purpose is front-loaded ahead of the auth requirement. Slightly dense parenthetical enumeration but every clause carries information.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns and the auth requirement, which is close to sufficient. The remaining gap, the exact shape of each plan record, is minor and partially addressed by the enumerated fields.

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% and the schema already labels access_token as a required Gateway JWT. The description adds only that it must be a registered-user token, a marginal clarification; baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ("List") and a well-scoped resource ("platform plans for B-side tenants"), and enumerates the plan attributes returned (quota, rate limit, concurrency, BYOK). The scope distinguishes it from actora_tenant_usage, but the description never names that sibling, so differentiation is left implicit.

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 a prerequisite ("Requires access_token (registered-user JWT)") which implies the caller must be a registered user, but offers no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use, and no pointer to actora_tenant_usage for consumption data rather than plan metadata.

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