List tiers

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful invocation context with the required 'tiers:read' OAuth scope, but 'Reads account data' merely duplicates readOnlyHint and nothing is said about pagination defaults or what expand returns.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the operation, then the behavioral note and the auth requirement. Nothing is padded, though the opening sentence duplicates the title rather than adding information.

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?

Annotations cover the safety profile and the schema fully documents all parameters, so the description is minimally sufficient. However, for a paginated list tool with an expand option and no output schema, it could have noted that results are paged (default 10) and what stats/prices expansion yields.

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 description coverage is 100% and all six parameters (page, limit, expand, account, direction, publication_id) carry their own descriptive text with defaults and constraints. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List tiers'), so an agent immediately knows this is a read of tier objects. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like get_tier, create_tier, or update_tier, and the phrase largely restates the tool title, but the purpose itself is 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer get_tier for a single tier, and no prerequisites beyond the OAuth scope. The agent must infer usage context entirely from the name and schema.

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