Set License Tier

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

Goes beyond annotations by disclosing a key side effect: 'Reverting to tier='free' re-enables limits (but does not delete any existing data that exceeds the limits -- it only blocks new writes)'. This is important behavioral context. Annotations already cover idempotency and non-destructiveness, and the description adds the specific limit behavior and environment requirement.

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 two paragraphs with active, front-loaded language. The first sentence clearly states the core purpose, and each subsequent sentence adds necessary context (purchase process, environment variable, side effects). It is slightly longer than strictly necessary but every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (license activation, environment prerequisites, and side effects), the description covers the workflow, prerequisites, and behavioral consequences. An output schema exists, so return values do not need to be explained. The only minor gap is the absence of explicit error conditions, but this is not critical for a setting tool.

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 only parameter 'tier' has 0% schema description coverage, but the description explicitly states the two valid values ('pro' and 'free') and what each does ('Pro tier removes all vault, document, storage, and version limits'; 'free re-enables limits'). This effectively compensates for the missing schema documentation, though it does not formally enumerate the values as an enum.

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?

Description opens with 'Activate a tier (free or pro) for LoreDocs', which clearly states the verb (activate), resource (license tier), and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like vault_tier_status and get_license_tier, which are read-only status/retrieval tools, whereas this tool changes the tier.

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?

Provides explicit prerequisites ('After purchasing a Pro license, set LOREDOCS_PRO=<your-license-key> in your environment and restart the server') and a step-by-step usage path ('then call this tool with tier='pro' to persist'). It explains when to use it for upgrading and downgrading, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., before license purchase), but that is implied.

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