registry_list_plans

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It communicates a read-only listing behavior and describes the returned content ('pricing and feature details'), which is useful. However, it does not mention potential limitations, such as whether plans are scoped by region or account, or whether any authentication is implied.

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 compact sentences, front-loading the action and resource, then briefly noting the return content. There is no filler or repetition.

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 output schema exists, so return structure is covered elsewhere. The description clearly states what the tool returns and there are no inputs to document. Minor context about whether 'all available' means all plans globally or only those available to the current account could improve completeness, but it is not essential for this simple no-parameter list 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?

With zero parameters, the schema is trivially complete and the description has no need to explain arguments. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description adds no redundant parameter information.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all available container registry plans'), making it clear this tool retrieves container registry plan information. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like plan_list_plans or db_list_plans, but the resource qualifier 'container registry' provides enough distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other plan-listing siblings. An agent must infer from the name that this is for container registry plans, but there is no explicit 'use this when' or alternative routing.

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