ghost_get_tiers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses retrieval and filtering by type, but omits details on pagination (limit/page), ordering, includes, and authentication requirements. The description adds moderate value beyond the schema but has significant gaps.

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 clear sentence with zero waste. It is front-loaded with the primary action and resource, and efficiently communicates filtering capability.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain return values, but it only says 'list of tiers'. It lacks details on recommended usage (e.g., when to use pagination parameters), potential errors, or required permissions. For a tool with 5 optional parameters and no annotations, the description is incomplete.

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%. The description adds context that filtering can be by type (free/paid), which clarifies the 'filter' parameter's usage. However, it does not explain other parameters like limit, page, include, or order beyond what is in the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description partially compensates 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Retrieves a list'), the resource ('tiers (membership levels)'), and the context ('from Ghost CMS with optional filtering by type (free/paid)'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like 'ghost_get_tier' (single) and 'ghost_create_tier' (create).

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 usage for listing tiers with optional filtering, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ghost_get_tier for a single tier, ghost_search_members for searching). No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided.

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