Get cloud-to-cloud plan pricing

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly discloses that this is billing information only and does not return account/data content, which is useful behavioral context. It does not spell out side-effect safety, but 'returns' strongly implies a read-only operation and the content scope is clearly bounded.

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 concise and front-loaded, with the main purpose in the first sentence and the boundary in the second. The reference to docs/api-map.md and 'Still needed from you' item 6 adds useful context but is slightly extraneous for tool invocation, keeping it from a perfect score.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete: it states what is returned, what is excluded, and why. The content list (current plan, monthly/yearly price, promo code) gives the agent enough expectation to invoke and interpret the result correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the 0-param baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter documentation needed, and the description correctly focuses on what the response contains.

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 names a specific verb and resource: returns iDrive's cloud-to-cloud product tier pricing/upsell info, including plan, price, and promo. It also draws an explicit boundary against connected cloud accounts and backed-up data, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_account_usage and get_dashboard.

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 states exactly what the tool is for (pricing/upsell info) and clearly states what it is not for: listing connected cloud accounts or backed-up data. It even notes that no such endpoint has been discovered, preventing the agent from attempting an unsupported use.

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