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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds one piece of genuine behavioral context the annotations don't carry: data is 'copied from vendor pricing pages,' implying a snapshot that may not be live. It stops there, with no note on freshness, coverage, or what happens when harness is omitted.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by the parameter hint. No filler; the provenance clause in sentence one is slightly tangential but still informative.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional param and no output schema, the description should at least sketch the return shape and the no-argument behavior. It conveys the resource well but leaves the default case (all harnesses?) unspecified.

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 0% and the schema is a bare string, so the description carries the burden and mostly does: it names harness as a slug and supplies concrete example values ('cursor', 'claude-code'). It doesn't enumerate valid slugs or clarify the default/aggregate behavior when omitted.

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: retrieves coding agent plans and prices. The resource differs clearly from siblings (get_guide, get_mcp_server, search_atlas), though the description doesn't explicitly contrast itself with them.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource (use this to look up pricing) and the optional harness argument is explained, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus get_guide/get_mcp_server, nor any exclusion or prerequisite stated.

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