set_tier

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

Without annotations, the description takes on the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions auto-detection based on allowance state and the possible returns (success or payment details if x402 payment needed). However, it does not explicitly state that this is a mutation operation or detail side effects like charges.

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 concise at two sentences, but lacks a front-loaded summary of the primary action. The first sentence lists verbs, and the second adds auto-detection and return info. It is efficient but could be slightly more direct.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description explains the core behavior (auto-detection, possible payment requirement) adequately. It omits prerequisites like authentication, but these are likely assumed.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema's description for 'tier' already includes the auto-detection context. The tool description adds no new information beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 tool's purpose: to subscribe, renew, or upgrade a tier. It uses a specific verb ('set tier') and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like 'tier_status' by noting auto-detection of the 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 implies usage context (auto-detects action based on allowance state) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'tier_status' or 'allowance_create'. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance are provided.

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