Free sample of a plan

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real context: auth (‘no key needed’), that the response names full CSV/DB files in `files`, and that only one row is returned. It doesn't mention rate limits or what happens for an invalid tier, so not a 5.

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?

Two tight sentences that front-load the core purpose and then add the file-location detail. Every clause carries information, with only minor density in the path sentence.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description steps in to describe the return shape (series counts per lane, one aligned 1-minute row, a `files` field). For a single-optional-param read tool this is close to complete; only edge behavior for bad tiers is missing.

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 0% and the single `tier` param has no enum, so the description carries the burden by enumerating the four valid values (free, builder, pro, max). It compensates well for the coverage gap, though it doesn't say what an invalid value does; a 4 rather than 5.

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 resource (‘the free sample of one plan’) and enumerates exactly what the response contains: series counts per lane plus one aligned 1-minute row. It's clear what the tool returns, though it doesn't name a specific sibling (e.g. tilla_tick) to explain why this is a sample rather than the full feed.

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?

‘no key needed’ implies a preview/unauth context and ‘the full one-tick files are at …’ hints at the boundary between sample and full data, but there is no explicit when-to-use / when-not / alternative named among the 13 siblings. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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