Create Micro billing checkout

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent mutation. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: the session is hosted and does not accept payment credentials, which clarifies the boundary of what the tool can and cannot do. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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?

Two short sentences carry all essential information with no filler. The primary action and scope are front-loaded, and the clarifying limitation about payment credentials is placed in a natural second sentence.

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 small parameter count, existing output schema, and annotations, the description covers the key behavioral distinction and the hosted nature of the checkout. It does not explain what 'inspected' means or address how the resulting session is used, but nothing required for basic invocation is missing.

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 schema documents the confirm parameter reasonably, but the plan parameter only has a pattern and no semantic description. The description's phrase 'one inspected Micro plan' adds some context for the plan parameter, but no additional detail about parameter values or relationships is provided, so the compensation is partial.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Create a hosted checkout session for one inspected Micro plan.' It clearly distinguishes this from generic billing tools by adding 'hosted' and 'does not accept payment credentials.' The purpose is immediately unambiguous.

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 the tool is for creating hosted checkout sessions for a single inspected plan, and it warns that payment credentials are not accepted. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like micro_billing_portal or state when to prefer this over them, leaving some routing to inference.

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