Check upgrade status

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description confirms read-only, no quota consumption, and details the returned fields (tier, status, period end, etc.), adding that starting Pro requires a payment method and terms. No contradictions.

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?

Description is thorough yet efficient, front-loading the main purpose, listing use cases, then detailing output and prerequisites. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 0 parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers all behavioral aspects: input constraints, output details, and usage context. No gaps remain.

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?

Tool has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. Description adds no param info (none needed) but explains what the tool returns, which is valuable context. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 checks the caller's own Website Auditor subscription standing, listing specific questions it answers (e.g., 'am I on Pro,' 'is my trial still active'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by being unique for subscription status, while siblings focus on tracking, audits, and reports.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when someone asks...' and 'before suggesting an upgrade,' providing clear context. Also notes it works with any valid API key and consumes no audit quota, giving practical guidance.

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