List plans
lago_list_plansList billing plans, paginated. Lago API: GET /plans.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number for pagination. | |
| per_page | No | Number of records per page. |
lago_list_plansList billing plans, paginated. Lago API: GET /plans.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number for pagination. | |
| per_page | No | Number of records per page. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, confirming a safe read operation. Description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'list' and 'paginated', missing details like authentication requirements or rate limits.
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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Includes API endpoint for reference.
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 paginated list tool with good schema and annotations, the description is largely sufficient. Lacks specifics about return format, but no output schema exists to require that explanation.
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%, so the description does not need to explain parameters. It mentions 'paginated', which hints at page and per_page, but adds no further semantic value beyond the schema.
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?
Clearly states verb 'List', resource 'billing plans', and key feature 'paginated'. Distinguishes from sibling 'lago_get_plan' which retrieves a single plan.
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?
Describes what the tool does but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or how to choose pagination parameters.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.