List User Plans

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds genuinely new context by disclosing the 1000/day shared request budget each call consumes. It stops short of noting that maxPages multiplies that cost, leaving part of the rate-limit story in the schema.

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 tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, followed by the cost caveat. Minor sloppiness in the trailing ellipsis inside the status list, but no wasted sentences.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully names the returned fields, and the cost disclosure covers the main behavioral risk for a read-only list. Pagination mechanics are left to the schema, which documents them adequately, so only small gaps remain.

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 60%, and orderBy/orderDirection lack descriptions entirely; the word 'Sortable' hints at their existence but does not map to them or explain defaults. The description adds little param meaning beyond field enumeration, consistent with a baseline of 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List subscriptions (user plans)') and enumerates the fields returned (user, status, local number, team), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not differentiate itself from siblings like telgea_find_user_plan or telgea_get_user_plan, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

'List' plus 'Sortable' implies bulk enumeration over single-record lookup, but the description never says when to use this instead of find_user_plan/get_user_plan or names any alternative. Usage is inferred rather than stated.

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