Get Instances Partner Fees

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that baseline: no pagination, result volume, or filtering behavior for what is an open-world read.

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?

Three words with no padding or filler, so nothing is wasted, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision. It is front-loaded but has essentially no content to front-load.

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 an instance-scoped list endpoint with no output schema and an undocumented parameter, the description should say what the response contains (fee records, effective dates, amounts) and whether results are paginated. Neither is present, leaving the agent to call blind.

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% for the single required parameter, instance_id; the only help comes from the example and 15-char length constraint. The description contributes no meaning about what an instance_id is or where to obtain one, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

"Retrieve Partner Fees" gives a recognizable verb and resource, matching the minimum needed to know this fetches partner fee data. But it is essentially a restatement of the title, and it does not clarify that this lists fees scoped to an instance nor how it differs from the sibling GetV1InstancesPartnerFeesById.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the by-id sibling as the alternative for fetching a single fee, and no prerequisites. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the collection/list variant.

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