plan

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

Goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by explicitly stating it does not apply anything and describing the return value (plan_id) and its downstream use. This is useful behavioral context for an agent choosing whether to call the tool.

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 compact sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, the non-applying behavior is stated immediately, and the return-value usage is explained efficiently.

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?

The description adequately explains the tool's purpose and output for the simple workflow, but it omits parameter details and any caveats about plan creation or scope. With no output schema and sparse param descriptions, more guidance would improve completeness.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not define either parameter. 'environment' is only mentioned generically in prose, and 'select_models' is entirely unexplained, so an agent cannot determine valid values or semantics.

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?

Description clearly states the tool previews changes without applying them, using a specific verb ('Preview') and resource ('a plan against an environment'). It distinguishes itself from apply_plan by explicitly noting this is the dry-run step.

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?

Provides workflow context by explaining the returned plan_id should be passed to apply_plan to actually apply the plan. It implies when to use this tool, though it does not explicitly list exclusions or alternative selection criteria.

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