Return bearer-owned subscription lifecycle and current-period quota. The account key is always masked in output.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the account key is always masked in output, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it describe error behavior or auth requirements beyond 'bearer-owned', leaving some ambiguity.
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 two short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. Every sentence adds value: the first states the core purpose and scope, the second discloses an important output behavior.
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?
Given the tool's low complexity and presence of an output schema, the description covers the core purpose but leaves gaps in usage guidance and parameter explanation. It is minimally viable but not fully complete for an agent to confidently invoke the tool without additional inference.
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_id, is not described in the tool description. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate, but it only hints at 'bearer-owned' without clarifying the relationship between account_id and the bearer or expected format/meaning.
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 returns subscription lifecycle and current-period quota, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling plan-focused tools like get_plan and list_plans by focusing on bearer-owned subscription status, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as get_plan, mrr_summary, or usage_summary. It simply states what it returns, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name alone.
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.