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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the backing endpoint (GET /api/v2/host/memberships) and the set of returned attributes, but says nothing about pagination defaults, disabled-plan handling, or rate limits beyond what the schema already documents.

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 with the core scope front-loaded and filtering mentioned second. The trailing endpoint reference is useful for mapping but slightly bolted-on, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns, and it does so by listing pricing, duration, credits, usage limits, and trial/intro flags. For a read-only list tool with fully documented parameters this is nearly complete; only pagination behavior is left unstated.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all eight parameters are self-documenting. The description only restates the session/appointment compatibility filters and omits any guidance on sortBy, sortOrder, includeDisabled, or reasonable pageSize values. 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 resource (the membership plans the studio sells), then enumerates the subtypes (subscriptions, class packs, money packs) and the fields surfaced. This is clearly distinguishable from momence_list_member_memberships, which covers a member's plans rather than the studio's catalog.

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?

The description offers one usage condition ('Optionally only plans usable for a given session or appointment'), which maps to the two compatibility filters, but gives no when-not guidance and never names an alternative sibling tool. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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