Create a free account for bearer attribution. The full account key is returned once; only its SHA-256 and last four characters are retained.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account_ref | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses critical behavioral details: the full account key is returned only once, and only its SHA-256 and last four characters are retained. With no annotations, this adds substantial transparency about data handling and one-time key exposure.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no filler. Every word adds value, making it highly concise and well structured.
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 covers the main purpose and a key behavioral nuance, but leaves the sole parameter undefined. Given the low complexity and presence of an output schema, this is a notable gap preventing full completeness.
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 only parameter, account_ref, is completely unexplained in the description. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate by clarifying what this reference is, its format, or how it relates to the account creation.
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 uses a specific verb ('create') and identifies the exact resource ('a free account') with its purpose ('for bearer attribution'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings focused on billing, subscriptions, and usage.
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?
It provides clear context: this tool creates a free account specifically for bearer attribution, implying when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it misses the top tier.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes: plan retrieval, checkout, portal, status, usage, MRR. The main overlap is between create_account and record_subscription, as record_subscription can create an account for a new bearer, which may confuse agents about when to call which.
The majority follow a verb_noun pattern (create_account, create_checkout_link, get_plan, list_plans, record_subscription). A few deviate: customer_portal_link (noun phrase), mrr_summary (acronym), and describe_agent (verb but not a subscription action), which slightly reduces consistency.
Ten tools is well within the ideal range for a subscription management server. Each tool covers a distinct aspect of the domain—account, plans, checkout, portals, subscriptions, usage, MRR—so none feel redundant or missing.
The tool surface covers account creation, plan browsing, checkout session creation, subscription activation, status checks, usage summaries, and MRR. A notable gap is the lack of direct update/cancel subscription tools, though this is partially mitigated by the customer portal link, which delegates those actions to Stripe's hosted UI.