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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond them: it discloses that only ids are returned, how the 'all' sentinel behaves, and the underlying GET /subscription/search endpoint.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the searchable fields come first, then the list-scoping caveat, then the routing hint. The semicolon-heavy packing is efficient, though slightly compressed compared to clean prose.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by stating that ids are returned and pointing to trumpia_get_subscription for details, and pagination is fully specified in the schema. It stops short of describing the result ordering or envelope, which is a minor gap for a read-only search.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by enumerating the searchable fields for search_type and clarifying that search_data 'all' returns every subscription holding data of that type. It does not add anything for page/row_size, which the schema already covers.

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?

States a specific verb (find) and resource (subscription ids) plus the full set of searchable fields, and explicitly routes to trumpia_get_subscription for full details. An agent can distinguish it from trumpia_list_subscriptions and trumpia_get_subscription without opening any schema.

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?

Names the follow-up tool when details are needed ('use trumpia_get_subscription for details') and notes the optional list scoping, giving clear context. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with the sibling trumpia_list_subscriptions, which is the nearest alternative.

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