list_product_rate_plans

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

No annotations are provided. The description indicates it's a GET request (non-destructive) and mentions pagination parameters (pageNo, itemPerPage), but does not disclose rate limits, error codes, or other behavioral traits. It adds limited context beyond the operation type.

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 sentences: the first states the purpose, the second adds the endpoint and optional parameters. It is efficient and front-loaded, though it could be slightly more concise by merging the sentences.

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 tool is simple (list rate plans), and the description covers the resource, endpoint, and pagination parameters. However, no output schema exists, and the description does not explain the return format or behavior when no results are found. It is adequate but not fully complete for a list endpoint.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so each parameter already has a basic explanation. The description only repeats parameter names and the productId format (URI), adding minimal extra meaning beyond the schema. A score of 3 (baseline) is appropriate when schema coverage is high.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'product rate plans', and the scope 'for a product'. It also includes the HTTP method and endpoint path, making the tool's purpose unambiguous. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_products or get_product_rate_plan_charges.

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 lists optional parameters but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as list_product_rate_plan_charges or get_product_rate_plan. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given, so the agent must infer from the name and parameters.

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