getPlanMonths

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only states the return behavior and does not disclose the side-effect profile, authentication expectations, or how last_knowledge_of_server affects results; 'Returns' implies read-only but is not explicit.

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?

At one short sentence, the description has no filler and is easy to scan. However, it is under-specified: it lacks the plan context and any sibling distinction, so the brevity is more minimalism than well-structured completeness.

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 two-parameter read with a full output schema, the schema handles parameter and return-value needs. The description is incomplete as a selection aid because it gives no usage context or alternative routing, and with no annotations the safety profile is not clarified.

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?

The schema covers both parameters 100%, including plan_id's special values ('last-used', 'default') and the semantics of last_knowledge_of_server. The description adds no parameter-level information, so the schema baseline of 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 uses a clear verb ('Returns') and identifies the resource ('all plan months'). It is not a tautology and, via the plural 'months', hints at the distinction from the singular getPlanMonth sibling, though it does not name it or mention the required plan_id context.

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 when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. It does not tell the agent to use getPlanMonth for a single month or getPlans for plan-level data, so the agent must infer selection from the name and schema.

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