billforward-mcp

get-rate-plan

Fetch detailed pricing structure and tiers for a product rate plan using its ID or data name.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific product rate plan by ID or Data Name. This will return the full structure including pricing components and pricing tiers, essential for understanding how the plan is billed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ratePlanIdOrName": "<ratePlanIdOrName>"
    },
    "name": "get-rate-plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ratePlanIdOrName`	Yes	The unique UUID or data name of the product rate plan

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Jul 1, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns the full structure including pricing components and tiers, which is helpful, but omits any side effects, permissions, or data freshness details. It is adequate but not thorough.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences long with no superfluous words. It immediately states the purpose and then explains the return value, making it efficient and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It specifies what is returned (full structure with pricing tiers). However, without an output schema, slightly more detail about the structure could be beneficial, but not essential.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes the parameter as a unique UUID or data name. The description repeats this without adding new semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves detailed information about a product rate plan by ID or Data Name, specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list-product-rate-plans by focusing on a single plan's full details.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is used when you need the full pricing structure for a specific plan, but it does not explicitly contrast when to use it versus list-product-rate-plans, nor mention any prerequisites or not-to-use scenarios.

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