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, idempotentHint=true. Description adds return field details and optional inactive parameter, reinforcing safe, non-destructive behavior.
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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no filler. Efficiently conveys everything needed.
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, description lists return fields. Covers use context and parameter. Complete for a simple read-only tool.
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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter. Description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's own description.
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?
Clear verb 'List' and specific resource 'subscriptions'. Returns field names, distinguishing from siblings like subscribe/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?
Explicitly states when to use: 'review what you're monitoring before adding more or to find an id to cancel.' Implies alternatives subscribe/unsubscribe.
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.
Each tool has a highly distinct purpose, from Disney character lookups to financial data and prediction market analysis. Agent can easily distinguish them by name and description.
Naming conventions vary wildly: some use verb_noun (list_characters), others are phrases (ask_pipeworx) or compound nouns (polymarket_arbitrage). No consistent pattern across tools.
34 tools is far too many for a Disney-themed server. Only 3 tools (list_characters, search_characters, get_character) relate to Disney; the rest are general-purpose data tools that belong elsewhere.
For a Disney server, the tool surface is severely incomplete. Missing basic CRUD for characters, no info on movies, parks, or media. Extraneous tools do not fill these gaps.