get_plan_settings

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses the default exclusion behavior of exclude_fields and how to override it (pass [] for all, custom list). This is key behavioral detail beyond a simple getter. No mention of auth or rate limits, but the tool is read-only by nature.

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?

Description is brief but includes an 'Args' section that is slightly verbose. However, the detail is necessary given the complexity of exclude_fields. It remains front-loaded with the purpose statement. Good structure.

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 output schema exists, return values need no explanation. Both parameters are fully explained. The description points to FIELDS.md for further details, which is acceptable. No gaps remain for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate fully. It does: explains plan_id as requiring a specific ID from list_plans, and provides a thorough explanation of exclude_fields including default, override, and custom list. Adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 clearly states it retrieves settings (date format, currency format) for a plan. Distinguishes from sibling get_plan (which would fetch broader plan details) and list_plans (which lists plans). Verb 'Get' is specific.

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 guidance for plan_id parameter ('use list_plans to find available IDs') and detailed behavior for exclude_fields. Lacks explicit 'when to use' vs alternatives, but the tool's purpose is straightforward and the parameter advice sufficiently guides correct invocation.

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