Get Pricing

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral details beyond restating the purpose; it does not disclose quirks like empty results or error handling, but for a public info tool this is acceptable.

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 a single concise sentence with no waste. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it immediately clear to an agent.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, annotations cover safety), the description is sufficient. It clearly states what the tool returns without needing to elaborate on return format, which is acceptable for a public info getter.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4. The description adds no parameter-related information because none is needed.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('public pricing information') with a clear scope ('for all tiers'). It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like listTiers, which likely focus on tier features rather than pricing.

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 implies usage when public pricing is needed, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. For a simple read-only getter, this is adequate but leaves the agent to infer when to choose it over similar tools.

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