list_billing_plans

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implies a read-only enumeration but never says so, and it omits whether results are paginated, how many plans are typically returned, whether the list is account-scoped or public, and whether auth is required.

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?

A single short sentence with the key information front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing to trim and nothing buried.

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?

The simple zero-parameter shape means the description does not need much, and naming prices and limits covers the return content at a high level. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of information about the response shape and access requirements, and it says nothing about either.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing the schema could document that the description must compensate for. Per the baseline for parameterless tools, a 4 is appropriate.

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 (List) and resource (available plans) plus the payload the caller can expect (prices and limits). No sibling tool in this server covers billing plans, so no disambiguation is required; the definition is clear on its own but not maximally specific (e.g., what a 'plan' contains structurally).

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?

There is no guidance on when to call it, whether it requires authentication, or how it relates to get_subscription, which is the obvious neighboring tool for account-level billing state. The agent must infer that this is a catalog lookup versus a subscription lookup.

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