ghl_marketplace_get_rebilling_config

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive nature. The description adds endpoint details (HTTP method, version header, source file) and OAuth scopes, confirming it's a safe read operation without contradicting annotations.

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 relatively concise, front-loading the purpose in the first sentence. However, it repeats similar information in the second paragraph. Overall efficient, but minor redundancy.

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 simple getter with two required params and good annotations, the description provides the endpoint, authentication details, and a brief note on return value (subscription and usage plans). Could mention potential response structure, but adequate for the tool's complexity.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score is appropriate.

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 tool retrieves rebilling config for an app subscription and usage plans. It uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'rebilling config', and the detailed endpoint differentiates it from sibling marketplace tools like ghl_marketplace_charge.

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 implies the tool is for reading rebilling configuration for the authenticated sub-account, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites or conditions where other tools might be more appropriate.

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