servicebus_purge_subscription

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It clearly labels the operation as destructive and explains that purging stops if max_messages is exceeded. It does not cover authorization or rate limits, but the core behavioral info is present.

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 sentences: purpose, destructive warning, and behavior limit. No extraneous words, and critical information is front-loaded.

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 the tool's complexity (destructive, 4 parameters) and lack of annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, that it's destructive, and the safety limit. It omits potential error conditions or prerequisites, but an output schema exists to clarify return values.

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?

The input schema has 0% coverage (no parameter descriptions). The description only adds meaning for `max_messages` via the stop condition. For `namespace`, `topic`, and `subscription`, no extra guidance is given, so the agent must infer their roles from the tool name alone.

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 'Delete all messages from an Azure Service Bus topic subscription.' This is a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('messages from a topic subscription'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling purge tools like `servicebus_purge_queue` and `servicebus_purge_dlq` by targeting a subscription.

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 a strong warning about destructiveness ('messages cannot be recovered') and explains the stop behavior when max_messages is exceeded. However, it does not explicitly compare with sibling purge tools (e.g., when to use purge_dlq instead), leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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