Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the result is a list of subscription IDs rather than full subscription details, but it does not state that the operation is read-only, whether results include inactive subscriptions, or anything about pagination or authorization.

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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant or filler language. Every word contributes directly to the stated purpose.

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?

For a simple two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain how this differs from related subscription tools or clarify what 'all' means in terms of active/inactive subscriptions.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, including the chain enum and its default. The description adds only that the listing is wallet-scoped, which is already conveyed by the required userAddress parameter.

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 states a specific verb and resource: list subscription IDs for a wallet. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as actora_subscription_detail, actora_subscription_check, or actora_central_subscription_check, so the agent must infer that this returns only IDs rather than detailed subscription state.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of subscription_detail, subscription_check, or central_subscription_check. The wallet-scoped listing is implied, but no alternatives or exclusions are named.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.