github_apps_get_subscription_plan_for_account_stubbed

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits, but it only states 'stubbed' without explaining side effects, permissions, response format, or limitations. The agent is left without critical safety or behavior information.

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 extremely concise—a single phrase with no wasted words. It conveys the essential purpose and variant status efficiently.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It does not explain return values, pagination, or any constraints. A more complete description would include what data is returned and any account access prerequisites.

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 100% coverage for the single parameter 'account_id', and the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's own description. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents it sufficiently.

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 action 'Get' and resource 'subscription plan for an account', and the qualifier '(stubbed)' distinguishes it from the non-stubbed sibling tool 'github_apps_get_subscription_plan_for_account'.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The 'stubbed' label implies testing/mock scenarios, but no further context or exclusions are given.

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