Unlock More Data

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

Annotations are all false, so the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it explains checkout binding behavior with an API key or MCP session, the email fallback, the one-click checkout flow, and which response fields indicate what happens next. This is rich, non-obvious behavioral context beyond what annotations provide.

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 front-loaded with the most important trigger conditions, which is good. However, it becomes verbose with exact pricing details, plan names, and promotional phrasing ('while seats last', 💳) that an agent does not need to select or invoke the tool correctly.

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 the tool's unusual checkout/payment side effects, the description covers the key cases: what triggers the tool, how checkout binds to the session, what the response will indicate, and what the free alternative is. The output schema and the description together give an agent enough to call and interpret the result correctly.

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 description essentially repeats the schema's explanation of the optional reason parameter. The description adds little beyond the schema, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 job: unlock DC Hub's full depth and provide upgrade/checkout links when data is partial or locked. It names concrete trigger conditions and distinguishes itself from claim_free_key by explicitly pointing to that sibling as the free-tier alternative.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: partial previews, locked tools, or a human wanting the full dataset. It also states exactly when NOT to use it — if the human wants the free tier, call claim_free_key instead — so an agent can route correctly.

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