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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds that the list includes tier label, token count, and price, which provides useful context about return content, but this may duplicate the output schema. No additional behavioral disclosures (e.g., auth requirements, rate limits, pagination) are provided, so a moderate score is appropriate.

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?

The description is only two sentences. The first sentence states the action and output contents, the second provides usage context. It is succinct, front-loaded, and every word provides value.

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?

The tool is low complexity: no parameters, simple list operation, with output schema present and comprehensive annotations. The description covers the core purpose and the primary usage context (before purchase). There are no significant gaps for the agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty. With no parameters to document, the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter meaning, and it does not. It correctly avoids mentioning parameters that do not exist.

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?

The description clearly states the action: 'List the available Pulse token packs' with specific return contents (tier label, token count, price). It also distinguishes this tool from sibling purchase_token_pack by referencing it and positioning this as a pre-purchase listing action.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: 'Use before purchase_token_pack to show options to the user.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke this tool and names the downstream alternative/pair, fulfilling the when-to-use requirement clearly.

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