List plans

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states the operation is public and requires no API key, and it enumerates the returned data categories. It does not discuss pagination or response format, but for a zero-parameter catalog this is reasonable.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Public plan catalog') and packs the key details plus an auth note into the remainder. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy.

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 no-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the essential context: what the catalog contains, that it is public, and that no API key is needed. It does not describe exact response shape, but the listed contents give sufficient operational clarity.

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 tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% by virtue of an empty schema. The description adds no parameter semantics, but the zero-parameter baseline of 4 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 identifies the resource as a public plan catalog and specifies its contents: prices, daily limits, and per-minute burst limits. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_rule_sets and list_evaluations, though the description relies on the title's verb 'List' for the action.

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 implies use when plan information is needed and explicitly states no API key is required, which is useful access guidance. However, it does not mention when to prefer this over siblings like get_usage or list_rule_sets, nor does it provide exclusions.

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