List your premium membership history, newest first.
Each item: ``id``, ``period``, ``status``, ``payment_method``,
``amount_paid`` (sats, may be null), ``currency``, ``started_at``,
``expires_at``, ``paid_at`` (null until paid), ``created_at``. Scoped
to you. Requires authentication.| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds authentication requirements and scoping, plus details on returned fields, complementing annotations without contradiction.
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 a single, efficient sentence followed by a list of fields. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no redundant 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?
The description fully covers the tool's behavior for a no-parameter query. It lists all returned fields and notes scoping and auth requirements. With output schema present, this is complete.
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?
There are zero parameters, so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. Baseline 4 per rubric 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 'List your premium membership history, newest first.' It specifies the resource (premium history) and action (list), and differentiates from sibling premium tools like status, pricing, subscribe.
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 notes 'Scoped to you. Requires authentication.' It implies usage for viewing own history, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives. However, sibling tools are distinct enough to avoid confusion.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.