list_subscriptionsList the caller's active subscriptions. Returns id, type, params, created_at, last_fired_at, fire_count for each. Use this to review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| include_inactive | No | Include cancelled subscriptions in the response (default false). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the returned fields (id, type, params, created_at, last_fired_at, fire_count) and mentioning 'active subscriptions' with the include_inactive parameter, going beyond 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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and return fields, followed by usage guidance. Every sentence adds value and is concise.
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 no output schema, the description adequately lists return fields. It covers purpose, usage, and parameter. It is complete for a simple list tool, though it omits details like pagination or error handling, which are minor gaps.
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% for the single parameter include_inactive, and the input schema already provides a description. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 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 the caller's active subscriptions' with a specific verb and resource. The title 'List Subscriptions' reinforces this, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like subscribe and unsubscribe.
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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use this to review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel.' This tells the agent when to use the tool and what to do with the results.
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.
Tools have distinct purposes with clear descriptions, but ask_pipeworx_beta currently duplicates ask_pipeworx, and the multiple prediction market tools could be confusing without careful reading.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun or noun_verb pattern, with no mixing of conventions.
34 tools is high for a single server, covering chain data, Pipeworx research, and prediction markets. While well-organized, the breadth pushes the boundary of manageable scope.
The tool set covers major query operations for chains, entities, and data sources, with subscription and memory features. Minor gaps like lack of chain creation are acceptable given the server's focus on data retrieval.