Listar planos de assinatura

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and side-effect-free behavior. The description adds that the tool returns recurrence data and current configuration, enriching the behavioral model. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two concise sentences in Portuguese, front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every sentence adds value: the first states what it does, the second specifies when to use it. No wasted words.

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 that the tool has an output schema (with nested objects) and annotations covering idempotency and safety, the description effectively provides the remaining context: recurrence data and usage scenarios. It is complete for a list/query tool of this complexity.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters (name, limit, offset). The description does not add significant detail beyond the schema, but it hints at using the name parameter to find the appropriate plan, which provides minor additional context. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it lists registered subscription plans and their recurrence data, using the verb 'Lista' and resource 'planos de assinatura'. It differentiates from sibling tools like create_plan, delete_plan, and create_subscription by specifying its role in finding the appropriate plan before creation or querying current configuration.

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 explicitly advises using this tool to locate the right plan before creating a subscription or to consult current settings, providing clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the guidance is specific and covers primary use cases, so it meets a high standard.

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