lc_list_billing_plans

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the trivial implication of listing. With no annotations, the description carries full burden but fails to mention side effects, authentication needs, or return nature. It is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 one sentence, very concise, and front-loaded with the action. It wastes no words, though it might be overly brief for a tool with a parameter.

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?

Despite low complexity (one optional param, no output schema), the description lacks completeness. It does not hint at return values or what 'available billing plans' entails, leaving ambiguity about the output format.

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% (no parameter descriptions). The description does not explain the 'limit' parameter, nor does it add any meaning beyond the schema. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 function: 'List available billing plans.' It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('billing plans'), distinguishing it from sibling billing tools like lc_get_billing_details and lc_get_billing_status.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like lc_get_billing_details might be more appropriate for detailed plan info, but the description provides no such context.

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