Create a browser link for your human to pick channels themselves.
For a fast start without human input, use start_subscription instead.
Link expires in 7 days.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent_email | Yes | ||
| human_email | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the link expires in 7 days, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose other important behaviors like whether link creation requires specific permissions, if it is idempotent, or what happens if the link expires before use.
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 three short sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, alternative, and expiry. No wasted words. Front-loaded with core 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?
Given this is a simple tool with 2 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and moderate complexity, the description covers the purpose, alternative, and key behavior (expiry). It does not explain return value or parameter constraints, but for a simple link-creation tool, it is mostly adequate.
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 0%, so the description needs to compensate. It does not explain the meaning or format of either 'agent_email' or 'human_email' beyond what the schema provides. While context from the tool name and description implies usage, no additional semantics are added, so baseline 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 the tool creates a browser link for human channel selection, with a specific verb ('create') and resource ('setup link'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'start_subscription' by noting the alternative is for fast starts without human input.
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 this tool (for human-driven channel selection) and when to use the alternative 'start_subscription' (for a fast start without human input). However, does not provide guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it beyond the single alternative.
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 are mostly distinct: try_sample shows a preview, start_subscription activates, create_setup_link offers an alternative path. However, get_bundle and get_template could be confused (both return HTML and mention {4bots}), and get_summary overlaps slightly with list_channels (pricing info appears in both).
Names consistently use verb_noun pattern (create_setup_link, start_subscription, list_channels, get_bundle). The only minor inconsistency is get_summary vs the more specific get_bundle/get_template/get_session—the verb 'get' remains uniform but 'summary' is vaguer than the others.
9 tools is appropriate for a subscription content service. There is one tool for each key action (preview, subscribe, fetch, manage account, vote, view info). The count feels well-scoped—not too few to cover the domain, not too many to overwhelm.
Core lifecycle is covered: try_sample (preview), start_subscription/create_setup_link (subscribe), get_bundle (daily delivery), get_session (account status), list_channels/vote (discover/select channels). Minor gaps include no unsubscribe/stop tool and no update_subscription to change channels, but the primary workflow is complete.