onboarding_get_plan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the endpoint path – no note on whether results are scoped to the caller's organization, pagination behavior, or result ordering.

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?

Very short, but two of the three lines say the same thing ('Query for onboarding plans' twice) and the third is a raw HTTP path. The redundancy wastes the little space there is rather than front-loading useful detail.

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 read-only, fully documented, zero-required-parameter query tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It still leaves open what a returned 'plan' contains and how results are scoped, which an agent would want before selecting it.

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 100%, with limit, expand, filter, and select each documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description contributes no additional meaning about how these query options interact or any defaults.

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 the resource (onboarding plans) and that it is a query/list operation, but the same clause is repeated twice and the HTTP path is restated, adding no differentiating information. Nothing tells the agent how this differs from onboarding_get_plan_by_id or onboarding_get_wo_execute_plan beyond the sibling's own name.

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 indication of when to use this list tool versus the by-id, post, patch, or delete plan siblings, and no mention of prerequisites such as organization scope beyond the vague 'current organization'. The agent must infer usage purely from the name.

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